GM on CNBC
By Bob Lutz
GM Vice Chairman
Wednesday night, I watched Phil LeBeau’s hour-long special on CNBC, which was titled “Saving GM.” And I must say, I came away impressed — and not just because they got my name right (although, not quite my title — I am, after all, vice chairman of global product development, not global quality).
No, I was impressed with the balance, the fairness, and the journalistic integrity of the entire piece. Our story is there, warts and all, but so are the things we’re trying to do to help this company survive and thrive in the future. The missteps we’ve made in the past were clearly spelled out, as are the challenges we face today. It’s no puff piece, that’s for certain.
After everything I’ve seen written about GM in the past couple of weeks — some of it fair analysis, but a good bit of it irresponsible speculation or uninformed opinion and bias — it was refreshing to see someone pointing out that we’ve been getting a lot of things right, too. And CNBC’s conclusion is much like our own, that we need the words “smash hit vehicle from GM” to make more people think of cars in showrooms, not museums.
If you’re interested in seeing an unflinching but unquestionably fair look at General Motors — not to mention getting an inside look at some of our design studios and test tracks — you should check out “Saving GM” when it re-airs on Sunday evening, August 10, on CNBC at 10 pm EDT. And for those of you who saw the program, let us know what you thought.
142 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
Mr.Lutz
You are the reason GM is still on top, I just purchased my 08 cts loaded and man very impressed, even my wife who bought japanese before we met is very impressed , if GM can keep delivering like that time to buy stock but if you get complaicent its over,and keep up with demand here in so cal., need more cars, could not find a Malibu to test drive, seems like you could open more plants more production or let toyota do it. My wifes next car she says is the Camaro!
keep it up Bob
“…but a good bit of it irresponsible speculation or uninformed opinion and bias…”
Dear Mr. Lutz,
I recall all the garbage, the media have distributed over here a few years ago, regarding Opel’s situation at that time. They seriously questioned, whether Opel even may stop production anytime soon. And now we see, Opel is alive and kicking. In the meanwhile, when the media over here sometimes spread the same nonsense about GMNA, I simply turn off the TV-set or switch to another channel, since I reliably know, that’s all garbage again. It makes me tired and bores me to death. Some journalists are only focused on fat headlines, no matter how to get these. Where have they been as Nissan was practically bankrupt in 1999? What about the very serious financial problems Mitsubishi used to have just a few years ago, as even DaimlerChrysler axed its ties with them? Well, of course, these wouldn’t have delivered fat headlines, as those car-companies do not belong to the World’s largest. Sometimes I get the impression, that there’s even more gloating, when it is an AMERICAN company, having worries. I can do without this sort of so-called journalism.
Of course there will be more challenging years ahead of GM, at least until 2010, when this VEBA-deal with the UAW kicks in. The problem is not (longer) the product, but its perception, and, first of all, the cost structures. As European manufacturers demonstrate, it actually is possible to be profitable as a car-manufacturer, also without numerous SUV’s, but with midsize- and even compact cars, GM could prosper by selling those segments as well. Volkswagen continues making billions of Euros with its Golf and Passat and Opel also makes money with its corresponding models (especially with the Astra, and the hot-selling Corsa). Of course also the US-Government is in charge to support the American manufacturers at the upcoming times of transition.
Mr. Lutz,
I did see the program, and came away wanting more. There were just too many commercials. LeBeau is pretty good at covering the auto industry. It is sad to see that there are people out there that won’t even consider a GM product because of the misconceptions they have. That may be a way to win, though, if they keep underestimating you. After all the issues involved with GM, and all the critics and cynics, there are still people out there that want to believe. Someday (hopefully sooner rather than later), it would be nice to see things recover in full. I know you guys will nail the Volt, along with all of your new products coming down the line.
As a side note, I’d like to see your response to the critics who say GM today acts like it still controls 50% of the US market, that you have too many brands and too many balls in the air to support them all. I’ve seen this interesting argument that basically says by trying to market all of these brands and products, you effectively market nothing.
Keep up the great work.
I have seen the CNBC documentary titled “Saving GM,” and I have to admit, the documentary left me feeling a whole lot more secure in the belief that GM may truly have a future. Though, having had time to think over all the information I took in while viewing the video, I am left with even more questions.
Questions that nag me most are; why aren’t the top managers ever held financially accountable for a company’s poor financial performance, like they are in a company’s successes; and, why is it that the “little guy” (on the assembly line), is always made suffer the full consequences of bad decision-making?
I watched and enjoyed the piece myself. As an avid industry enthusiast (although not a particularly sporting driver) it’s encouraging to see some balanced coverage in the media. I think the piece only scratched the surface, though. Some thoughts:
1. Mr. Wagoner dodged a hardball question when asked why he should still be on the job. Mind you, I have no opinion on this matter, but the loss of shareholder value has been striking. Nowhere but the auto industry do executives keep their jobs with that kind of performance. Why should he stay? More clarity on this issue would be nice.
2. The 30 year (or so) line veteran who remarked that the top brass keep their jobs and perks while his ilk get laid off or shuffled around was onto something: True leaders would share the pain more. Auto execs in the C-suite are paid exorbitantly relative to the rank and file and that payment is not tied to performance (key phrase, that.) How can you rally the troops without a sense of shared sacrifice? I’m not saying to go into the poorhouse, but the board should recognize a disconnect between the salaried folk and the hourlies and at least move to symbolically close the gap. Gestures go a long way, Just ask Steve Jobs who took a $1 salary and tied his benefits to the stock when the company was in dire straits. Now look at Apple.
3. The bureaucracy was not addressed. IMHO this may be the biggest silent killer in Detroit. Mulally realizes that. Cerberus…well, who knows what Cerberus knows, but you, Bob, certainly realize that when you reinvigorated the design & development processes to great success at Chrysler and GM. What happened after you left at Chrysler? the momentum in product was lost to inertia (granted German inertia is a whole different animal) What’s to stop gravity from reasserting itself after you eventually leave GM? I’ve heard -in truth, anecdotally only- that some seriously stifling conditions still abound. Can you speak to this concern?
Full Disclosure: I own an ‘04 Malibu Maxx and a Toyota Sienna. Both excellent vehicles.
As an aspiring college student wanting to be involved in product development, I cant help but have a feeling in my heart that “GM is on the right track”. No matter what I hear people speculate or rumor, the proof is what you see on GM dealer lots today. Compared to 5 years ago at least. I have faith in GM just like my grandfather, who worked for GM for 35 years, did. I too plan to be involved with Product development and can only hope that I get a job from GM because I see what GM sees. People just need to have faith that GM will deliver.
Try this: MAKE BETTER CARS!
i agree. it was very interesting and very unbiased. the only thing i didnt like was what the shoppers at the toyota dealership were saying.it made me realize that people d still think that of gm
I too thought it was a fair representation of the global GM. The perception problem effects all of the American auto companies. Getting someone “back” after they have had a bad experience is next to impossible. I kind of fit into that catagory in that prior to my current ‘08 Aura XR (a world class car btw), my former GM models consisted of a ‘91 GMC Sonoma pickup and an ‘84 Pontiac 6000, both of which caused significant grief for this owner. For years, we were peppered with claims of quality improvements from GM and others, but I never bought into it. Until the Aura, a number of Ford and Honda automobiles and SUV’s shared my garage space. That is until Mr. Lutz joined GM. I’ve always been impressed with his career and accomplishments, and I believe he is one of the few “car guy” executive we have left. Looking to Europe for “fun to drive” vehicles, we can now share in the driving enjoyment only the Germans and Aussies have been able to do in the past. It took a few years for his magic to appear in showrooms but the list is impressive and growing with each model year. I wish GM well. I believe they are once again going to prosper albeit with a smaller piece of the total global market. I also believe this period in automotive history with its monumental challenges will be studied in business classes around the world for years to come.
The one thing you have to remember about the people at the toyota dealer is like here in so cal. were they convince and totally go Against there own country is that American cars are bad and toyota and honda are the best, PLEASE! thats why I see everyday toyotas on the freeway broken down, there all Koo-aid drinkers. stop the madness….
Thanks
I too saw the program and was impressed by the responsible nature of the reporting. The efforts of 60 Minutes and the ilk of Michael Moore had made me extremely wary of the media reportage on our industry. It was like a breath of fresh air. I have been a satisfied GM customer for the last 5 years, having had Ford, VW, Volvo, Saab. Toyota, Alfa Romeo and Mercedes Benz vehicles in the past. The most disappointing vehicles have been MBs after the early ’90s, the quality just went down the tubes.
Keep up the good work Bob!
A well written article on GM. I to am a believer in GM. I worked in GM dealerships as a mechanic for 31 years I’m retired now. I also have taken a terrible beating on their stock but I still believe the stock will come back. I believe if GM should ever fail so will the economy of this nation. I have owned seven GM cars since 1959 and only had trouble with one, and the problems were not really that bad, That was a 1963 Corvair Spyder. The rest were flawless.
Bob,
If you read this, and you may, it’s nice to see such a non blue blazer khaki pants officer at such a large company. For the past 20+ years I have closely watched the auto industry first as an enthusiast and later adding a business school and entrepreneurial perspective. You have always been a particularly interesting “car guy” to me when the industry was filled with, well, non car guys.
There are few venues where the auto buyer/enthusiast on the street can comment to the executive in the proverbial tower, so here goes.
You’re influence on GM is apparent. Ed Welburn is a tremendous talent and it appears that he is given proper authority in his own dept. The Saturn/Opel venture was also well played. Cadillac, again, a great story, short of the confusing overlap of the CTS and the neglected STS/DTS (why did China get a far superior interior on the STS?).
There have been some decisions where I’ve been puzzled. Maybe they are your decisions, maybe the board’s.
- Delaying Insignia’s U.S. introduction? I have to say, the first thing that went through my head was “A car with class leading looks and features. Why send it to America? We might actually sell them and make some money.” Do you sense the sarcasm? GM has finally started selling cars that are competitive. The Insignia would blow the Maxima, Camry, Altima, Fusion, Milan (laugh), Accord, you name it out of the water. This car would be groundbreaking for GM in the U.S. That said, wouldn’t adding U.S. production allow better utilization of time, resources, better economies of scale, rid the U.S. of a less than competitive Aura, streamline suppliers, allow for more efficient engineering moving forward, etc., etc., etc.? And the same would apply to the upcoming Astra, and others? If GM is in the process of making big expensive decisions, make one to bring all continents on the same page at the same time and save money in the long run. Yes, you just invested in tooling for the Astra for the U.S. Big deal. It is money, but the long term value and the shock factor of the quick moves would more than payoff. You like the Aura? Try this one! Sell at a premium to the Malibu but just under Invicta (see below). I can’t say how impressive this car looks just in pictures. You should be proud. Offer it to everyone. Don’t slight the home team.
- More recently, Invicta. This is minor but worth bringing up. To break clean of old models, and offer a newer face of the brand, why keep the LaCrosse name? The LaCrosse name is associated with a warmed over, has been, platform that appealed to what will be a short lived demographic. Invicta is a new name for a new car that bares no resemblance to the LaCrosse. This, with the Enclave (also a new name used in place of Rendezvous) should be the new face of the new Lexus challenging Buick. I didn’t mention Lexus beating. Not yet. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
I’m sure there’s more to these decisions, but perception is reality to the man on the street.
Sometimes, maybe, an opinion from a unique perspective may be worthwhile.
Keep up the good work. It will pay off, but you know that.
Dan Belcher
“Saving GM” involves saving Buick. So how could GM let the “LaCrosse” name stand, when EVERYbody has been asking for the new Buick Epsilon II to be called “Invicta,” like the Concept?
Bob
I assume this story was put together before the recent quarter earnings announcement, I wonder if the tone of the story would have been a little less hopeful after the incredible 15billion dollar loss announced.
Quite frankly I’m not convinced that GM has fixed the disease that creates the constant decline in market share, the constant decline in stock price, the constant promise of a turn around and the constant flow of excuses for the latest unforseen circumstances.
It’s not that hard, GM like all car companies will always be caught by unfirseen circumstances – it takes a long time to develop a car, by the time you react to a market demand, the market will have moved on.
You must develop a wide and balanced range of cars and trucks… If GM had followed this philosophy we would have serious competitor for the Corrola and Civic now not in 3 years time…
We would also not burdened by an oversized truck portfolio at this time…
You can’t predict what the world will want in 3 years time – so don’t put all your pennies on one horse.. I know it’s tempting to stop making all the big cars now and build 10 different brands of economy car… But GM has done that before with trucks and 15billion dollars later that didn’t seem like the brigtest idea!!
I watched the CNBC show and I too recall the horrible quality of the 80’s. Fast forward to 2005 when I tried to put the past behind me and try a new GM vehicle again. The quality of my Tahoe was not much better than the old days. Three steering boxes in 1.5 years with continued denial by the Chevy dealer, the GM regional rep, and Detroit made me vow never ever to make that mistake again. I really loved the SUV, the ride, stereo, and many features were nearly first class. But I can’t stand it when the dealer has my ride for longer periods than I do – and I have to argue to get the problem corrected. That’s no way to treat a customer.
Bob, the problem is not with car guys like you – it’s with Bo and his staff of buyers that only care about cost at the expense of performance, reliability, resale value, and obviously sales. While GM’s perceived quality has unquestionable improved, the long term reliability and market value have yet to be proven. I’m sure some buyer in the powertrain group had a bright idea to buy the cheapest steering box that they could get, regardless of performance. And probably got promoted by meeting a cost target while losing this customer for life. Congratulations Bob – you have met the enemy and tthe GM buyers are your worst problem. Are they rewarded by increases in vehicle sales and GM profits? No, I didn’t think so, and that’s the root of the problem that has plagued GM for 20 years.
The CNBC show goes on to chart the declining sales trend with GM – while playing the same market spin about improved quality year after year after year. Merely stating quality improvements while the market share continues to decline. You’ve lost a generation Bob by not putting solid product behind the market claims. It will take a generation to turn it around with the best stuff available. And that does not come cheap. You screwed the public over and will continue to pay for that mistake. Maybe you should remind Bo of that piece of history. The cheapest cost = the poorest quality, obviously something has to give. In my case it was the steering box. And I’m not about to find out what is next.
Hi, I can see GM’s efforts but please Mr Lutz, let the GM division that I like make cars that I like again! (and let them be sold here in North America!) .
You should see the simile on my face when I drive my ‘65 Wildcat. It’s a driver which is far from being perfect cosmetically but it’s such a nice car, I’ll try to keep it as long as I live!
It’s fun to drive, it’s powerful engine has the nicest sound, it’s transmission shifts flawlessly and it’s body is tight and rattle-free. Every accessory still works. The best thing about this car is the one that made me crazy about this car many years before I had my driver’s license: It’s how it looks.
I’ve owned that car for 4 years and I still often contemplate it in my driveway! Build anything close to that with a warranty and available new replacement parts and I’ll be the happiest driver in the world!
I’ve been waiting for years now!
I just went to the service station tonight and there was a kid that was very excited about my car. He wanted to know more about it and he looked at it from every angle. That reminded me when I was about his age and I contemplated a rusted-out ‘65 LeSabre Custom hardtop coupe that belonged to the mother of one of my classmates.
Everyday, my school bus would pass beside the appartment building where this car was parked and I made sure I sat on the right side of the bus to have a view at it. During the summer, I would ride my bicycle about two miles just to have a look at it again and I also had to look inside it. I dreamed about being at the wheel of this car!
I told to my classmate that, one day I’d like to buy her mother’s car and she answered that it certainly wouldn’t happen soon as her mother absolutely loved that rusted out 21 years old car!
I was just 9 years old back then but I wanted a car like that so much that I have one almost like it today! And the one I have is even better than the car I dreamed about!
The only new car that currently makes me this kind of impression is the Dodge Charger. I don’t like much how it looks from the rear or inside but the front end is absolutely stunning. I like it even more today than when it was introduced a few years ago. The things I didn’t like about it were the large windshield posts, small windows, center posts (why no manufacturer currently offers a 4 door car without center posts?) and the sad interior with plastic door panels and ugly gray cloth on the seats (it was a base V6 model).
Please let Buick make RWD cars that look good. If they are nice enough so kids could dream about them, it’s a good start!
GM has come a long way. Improvements are coming in leaps and bounds. I recently read a blog (http://allcarsallthetime.blogspot.com/2008/08/holy-cow-chevrolet-cruze-spyshot-is.html) showing some spy shots of the upcoming Cruze’s interior and comparing it to photos of the Cobalt and Cavalier interiors. The Cobalt’s interior is pretty plain but palatable, but I didn’t realize how awful the Cavalier was until seeing the side-by-side comparison. And I drive a 96 Cavalier similar to the one in the photo! My girlfriend has a 93 Cavalier from the generation before mine and in all honesty, the interior is laughable. Mind you, she bought it used at 160,000 kms and she put in another 200,000 with minimal maintenance. My Cavalier has been good to me too even after 10 years of short trips to and from my current place of work which is supposed to be hard on a vehicle.
Looking at all the new cars coming from GM, good things are coming down the pipe.
To Weswald, in response to “Make better cars”
Please, stop repeating again and again all these biased statements. Thank you.
“With the likes of Mercury, Cadillac, Buick and Lincoln all ranking among the top eight brands in durability, the gap between foreign and domestic brands has nearly disappeared, Sargent said. …
…”The gap in perception is much wider than the gap in reality,” he said.
Annotation: David Sargent is the Vice President for automotive research at JD Power. He has been cited as mentioned two days ago at the Detroit News.
[...] GM will re-air on CNBC on August 10 at 10 pm ET, so set your TiVo. You can also read more about here at the CNBC website if you need more [...]
To Weswald re “Try this: MAKE BETTER CARS!”:
My response is: Malibu, CTS, Enclave, Acadia ! More to come !
Thanks,
Chris (Toronto)
Finish the Volt! I think this is your best chance right now to build a “smash-hit” vehicle.
Bob,
We need to cut down number of platforms/products/brands and focus only on the best.
Just check the Toyota/Honda website. This is simple.. lets foresight, plan, prioritize and be the number one in each segment else discard. Looks like, so many minds working but not in one direction.
Me..
Hey Bob, I didn’t see the show as we got rid of our cable and when CNBC+ online doesnt support Macs (hello, CNBC, you cover Apple, maybe you watch your own stories on the growth of Macs). But according to many of my friends whom I trust, they said it was good, but a little too much fluff pieces (like Dale Jr in the Camaro). I know GM is on the right track, and if the whole US market didnt fall off you’d be in better shape (Toyota is even off 29%). I am a bit worried that you are putting too much reliance on the Volt for your Hybrid answer (get more real two modes on the road). I hope the Cruze is as good as it seems. the 2010 LaCrosse is nice, I wish it was more in line with the Invicta concept (the concept was incredible, and would go over very well). And please let me know about the next-gen G6, if its going to be RWD. I wonder if you are trying to get more people to buy the G8 today to get the Pontiac perception back to where it should be, but don’t delay on G6 updates!
Keep up the good work!
Eric P
I watched it and thought it was very fair. However, aside from the Volt they didn’t actually explain how to save the company. Not that it really matters seeing as we pretty much all know what needs to be done.
They need to make high quality cars that are innovative and have a lot of visual appeal. I’m guessing coming up with great idea and designs is the easy part, and figuring out how to actually make it happen is what no one really seems to know.
The segments with Bob were awesome. He’s got such a great understanding of cars and what makes a good car good. I wish he would go on camera like that more often.
Bob,
I believe you and the company are on the right track. I have seen, up close and personal, the quality and refinement of the new Malibu and CTS….. but you CANNOT stop there.
It’s unfortunate but true: there is still a significant portion of the American car buying public who has negative thoughts about GM, and no amount of advertising, what you or Rick say in any news piece, or any dealer salesman, will change that. What WILL change that, is when a happy and satisfied Camry owner of 8 years and 200,000 miles of trouble free driving sees their neighboor, in a 2008 Malibu, have the same or better experience in the year 2016.
That is what it is going to take to right the ship for GM – 10 consecutive, solid, complete, and essentially astounding years of producing cars and trucks that DO NOT BREAK! Not a power window failur, not a radio glitch, not a strut wear out, not a head liner sagg, no oil leaking or burning, no coolant leaking, and no alternators wearing out….. on every car and truck that carries the blue square somewhere on or in it.
Are your engineers and factory workers really prepared, willing, and able to do that? Do they have the utmost committment from uper level management to put product first, be innovative, and concentrate relentlessly on details? If it costs an extra $2.00 to double seal the doors on every car and truck, are you willing to do it? Consistently? For the next 10+ years?
The Camaro is the next big thing from GM under your guidance in product development. First you had the Solstice/Sky, then the Aura and CTS, then the GMT-900 series trucks, then the Lambda SUVs, then the Malibu, and now the G8 and it’s offspring, the Chevy Camaro.
Is it unreasonable for me to expect that all the body pannels line up perfectly on every Camaro I look at? How about the doors – will they close with a solid “whoopf”? Am I overestimating that since the doors are frameless, they will use the intuitive sealing process that BMW and Audi uses on their frameless door coupes? For those who are not familiar, when you pull the door handle, if the window is rolled all the way up, the window automatically and quickly lowers a quarter inch and then when you close the door the window goes right back up into the weather seal.
I think it’s fair that GM be scrutinized to the “N”th degree right now – untill just the last 3 or 4 years, the company had been building garbage. You say those days are over and your cars today are the best in the world – prove it.
I beg to differ with whatever documentary out there. Read this at http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/autoweek-letter-tells-the-tale-of-motown-myopia/, and here are the highlights:”Our small car, the Chevrolet Aveo, fell 19.7 percent in U. S. sales in June,” Tom Wills of Wills Chevrolet writes. “Why? Surely this must be the right car for the times…. We have the best product we have ever had… Why aren’t you buying our products? What have the imports got that we don’t?” ”
Like “ONE FORD”, you should strive for “ONE GM”. You have already got the sensational Corsa in Europe, which sold 500,000 units a year! The Aveo should be based on Corsa, even the name too! And build it in Lordstown! You are basically wasting Opel’s fantastic engineering. The Corsa has what the competition (i.e. Honda Fit) has: quality, performance, styling, resale value, reliability etc.
And GM’s using money like water! You “lent” Delphi 350 million, on top of 3.6 billion you paid for Delphi’s UAW pension liabilities. You just paid another 277 million to settle a sharreholder lawsuit.
Come on GM! When did GM rip off its shareholders? Why do GM have to keep putting out other people’s fire ? If suppliers like American Axle and Delphi can’t supply the products, just buy it from another supplier. Don’t put your eggs in one basket. You basically paid American Axle to supply the parts for the trucks and SUVs that no one buys. And when they were striking, they were still supplying one customer: TOYOTA! I was basically shocked as to the degree GM was bullied!
And the two-mode hybrid is just a non starter. You should just license Ford’s full hybrid technology as used on the Ford Escape and soon to be used on the new 2009 Fusion(http://www.autosavant.net/2007/09/predicting-2009-fusion.html). And trust me Ford is doing right this time. The 2009 Fusion Full Hybrid will blow away the competition(mild hybrids and Camry hybrid).
And it no longer looks like a Gillette Fusion blade since they replaced the air vent with honeycomb grille.
I’m surprised I didn’t get any heart attack, but one day I may puke blood if I read one more news like this, where GM’s being incompetent or the butt of jokes. Sigh!
I think you have a lot of latent strength at GM but need to stop making semi good cars. This review is an example where a little more attention to important consumer issues would have produced a winner.
Autos > Research > Articles print send e-mail this page
IM this page
» Read more Autos Articles Best and Worst Affordable Small CarsBy Dan Carney, U.S. News provided by:
2008 Honda Civic HybridIn the U.S. News affordable small car rankings, there’s a clear trend: reviewers like small Hondas. The company’s products account for three of the top five affordable small cars, while Toyota’s youth-oriented Scion division and Mazda round out the top five.
Top Five Affordable Small Cars
Honda Civic
The Honda Civic delivers the convenience of a comfortable mid-size family car. Its smooth ride and interior space are favorites with reviewers, who appreciate the availability of uplevel options such as leather seats and a navigation system. However, some are put off by the outlandish two-level dashboard with digital speedometer.
More from U.S. News & World Report
» Find a More Fuel-Efficient Small Car
» Slideshow: Cars That Save You at the Pump
Honda Fit
Reviewers say that the compact five-door Fit has the soul of a sports car and the practicality of a wagon. Its fun-to-drive handling, nice appointments and flexible folding rear seat are highlights. Even better, Car & Driver named the 109-horsepower, 38 MPG fuel-sipper as part of its “10Best” list. An all-new 2009 model (scheduled release in the Fall) will gain electronic stability control, a feature not previously available.
Honda Civic Hybrid
Honda’s green Civic wins a spot as a stand-alone model thanks to its hybrid-electric drivetrain, which delivers as much as 45 MPG in highway driving. The Civic hybrid earns praise for going about its business with the regular Civic’s grown-up car manners and appearance. While the powertrain’s driving experience is similar to that of a conventional car, reviewers say that it is most similar to the driving experience of a slow car.
Mazda Mazda3
A product of Mazda’s “Zoom-Zoom” mentality, the Mazda3 wins over enthusiast drivers who enjoy its accurate, direct steering and well-controlled suspension. Testers like the Mazda’s adventurous styling, but are less impressed that side airbags don’t come with every level of equipment, and electronic stability control isn’t available at all.
Scion xB
Love or hate its distinctive exterior, the Scion xB combines plenty of space and a low price tag. When you add in its peppy, fuel efficient performance and the fact that it is highly customizable, you get a hot hatch that most reviewers recommend.
Bottom Three Affordable Small Cars
There’s consistency at the bottom of the class, as two of the bottom three cars are from Suzuki and one is a Chevrolet. But the cars share more than just low rankings: all three trace their origins to the General Motors subsidiary that encompasses the remains of former Korean automaker Daewoo.
2008 Chevrolet AveoChevrolet Aveo
Well, the Aveo is cheap, but, well, it’s cheap. The underpowered engine has to work hard and delivers gas mileage that is disappointing for such a small, slow car. The seats are literally a pain in the rear, and the steering earned criticism. Finally the Aveo has few safety features as standard equipment and side curtain airbags aren’t available for any trim level.
Bob : Are you tracking EEStor ? If it works, it
obsoletes everything out there.
I am still amazed at how long peoples perceptions last. GM hasn’t made a truly crappy car since the 1980’s. yet the perception by some that GM cars are still crappy lingers. Not only in the minds of consumers but in the minds of the editors of certain publications that many people go to for supposedly unbiased reviews. That said, I can understand why someone who has had bad experiences with a certain make of car would be hesitant to buy another car from that automaker. I’m probably the only guy on earth who has had trouble with three consecutive Hondas and have subsequently sworn off of them. Every car from GM and Ford that I’ve owned has been a good one. Even the ones that the consumer magazines have said were terrible. Honestly, I think that the presentation of some of GM’s cars need a little work, but the cars overall are on par with anything anyone else is selling.
By presentation I mean the interiors. This is where consumers will spend most of their time and the environment they’ll have to live with every time they drive their cars. Soft touch materials on the doors, dash and console would really spruce up some otherwise great interiors. I’m including the base models and lower end cars like the Cobalt in with that as well. Nobody likes seeing acres and acres of hard plastic everywhere. It makes the whole interior look and feel cheap. Presentation is one of the keys to changing perceptions.
The volt is an exciting car and I will be very interested in purchasing one once it’s available. I just hope that GM can come through with this. In regards to electric power sources etc, there is tremendous new American technologies out there today. Why hasn’t GM looked into technologies such as the AuraGen which is made by Aura Systems of California? I don’t understand why a company with the resources of GM is not looking under every rug in the country to try and find a solution to this electric/gas problem that we have. You guys need to seriously look into every possibility to once again become the automotive leader of the world.
Mr. Lutz: I agree with your point that GM was lax on the “details” in the past, and would say still are on many vehicles.
Although GM’s latest vehicles are showing improvement in this area they are not “world class”, hopefully GM will start to focus more on revenue than on profit margin and correct these shortcomings by putting features on cars like 8-way power seats where there are 4-way seats today, making fog lights, memory seats and back up sensors standard on every Buick model. These “details” will cost money and reduce profit margins on some vehicles, but can be made up with higher sales volume and will “push” these same vehicles up market. There is no “quck fix” or “cheap” way to do this and GM will have to bit the bullet on the profit side today if it wants to survive to tommorrow. I know this will not be popular and GM accountants who read this will pass out (or get mad), but GM has to boost revenue above all else in order to survive, this is a risky move but one that can work when GM sells more vehicles to skeptical buyers and they find what great vehicles GM is making today.
The upcoming LaCrosse (Invicta?) will find thousands more buyers with a long list of standard features and a price more like the current LaCrosse CX and CXL models, same can be said for the new Chevrolet Cruze that will be out soon – GM needs to offer features like a proper 8-way power seat with memory in this compact class car. This is similar to the point you made that some people can just look at a concept and know it will be a hit and others need to do time consuming and costly “studies”.
GM must make changes if it is to rid itself of past bad habits that have cost it more money than it “saved”.
You have improved the styling and interiors of GM vehicles boosting sales of cars like the Malibu, but until GM management make these cars compelling values in todays market GM will not be able to boost sales and profits in tommorrows market – in fact GM may not be a part of tommorrow’s market if it does’nt.
Bottom line is GM has to face the fact it is not the market leader it was 50 years ago and while product quality, powertrains and styling are competitive the value GM products represent is not and the only way to correct it is to make GM vehicles more of a value. As you pointed out in the show, the 50’s era GM cars gave buyers a lot of car for the money and is what will bring GM back to its leadership position in the future.
GM can do it if it is willing to make the pardigm shift from maximum unit profit to maximum total revenue.
Thanks again for your hard work and great new vehicles, keep it up.
I have the utmost faith In Bob Lutz.. This Economey has GM’s Attention.. now we just have to ride it out.
GM can beat this by adding more American Made Products Made here at home, It may be a Gobal Economey but its going to be a Local market.. wait and see..
Lutz said: “After everything I’ve seen written about GM in the past couple of weeks — some of it fair analysis, but a good bit of it irresponsible speculation or uninformed opinion and bias — it was refreshing to see someone pointing out that we’ve been getting a lot of things right, too.”
Mr Lutz,
My I point out that when journalists are uninformed, the primary cause would be GM’s public affairs office. Almost any journalist would like nothing better than to get the facts straight from you, Mr Wagoner, or a knowledgeable spokesperson speaking on your behalf — a spokesperson that actually knows what he or she is talking about, and one who gives facts instead of trying to spin things GM’s way.
The majority of journalists like nothing better than being able to tell the story using facts.
V/R
Gary Dikkers
The stock price of GM is plumbing 50 year lows, but when the business improves, eventually the stock price will follow. GM is being forced to make even more drastic cuts after years of painful restructuring due to the current economic situation. The economy will improve, and the rapidly falling price of oil will hasten that recovery. GM may even be offered huge, low interest loans by the federal government to ensure that it does make it through these difficult times. The cuts being made now will turn GM into a very lean company which will help it become very profitable as soon as the auto market returns to normal. In addition the cars which have been released in the last couple years are gorgeous and high quality. The upcoming cars like the Traverse, Camaro and Equinox continue that trend. The stock market is very focused on the possibility of bankruptcy. It will not happen and GM will be the greatest turnaround story ever. For examples of the gains that can be made when an auto company recovers, look at VW which has increased in market cap from $15 billion to $120 billion in less than 3 years, and Fiat which increased 5-fold. With GM’s market cap of $5.8 billion, it has even more potential for gains than VW or Fiat.
Well, I got the chance to watch Saving GM tonight, and it was a pretty good show. I have owned a GM vehicles ranging from 1964 to 2007, and I do understand GM quality. Each one has their inherent faults, including the 07, but what automaker doesn’t have that problem? Quality of the materials is the big thing right now, and at one time they did it right. In fact, I have a 1971 Nova that has the factory dash pad and steering wheel. Neither one is cracked, peeled or faded; and it sits outside all day! On the other hand, the 79 GMC Sierra and 91 S10 did not fare so well.
The Camaro must do well, and it seems it will fare very well. I do see it getting better fuel mileage than what is posted, but people won’t see that result for the first few months. How many people are going to buy the thing and not mash the accelerator first thing? If negative was possible, that would be the answer, but in reality, the answer is 0.
The Volt is a great thing. I know more than a few people who are not “car guys.” They all want the Camaro when it comes out, but they would pass up buying the Camaro and wait for the Volt. That says a lot for the design and function of the Volt; but please add a small solar panel to allow it to charge while they are at work. The major complaint I hear is having to charge it at work to complete the trip without gas.
When it comes to Mr. Wagner, the main problem I see with him is physical interaction.
Mr. Wagner, you bring no presence with you. The way in which you talk does not command attention. You need to talk with vindication, assert attention, and most of all; make it believable. Currently, if Mr. Wagner or Mr. Lutz were in a room, I would find my way to shake hands with Mr. Lutz first because he commands attention. Everyone understands the automotive industry is hurting. If you can look the blue collar worker in the eye, tell them it will be ok AND make it believable, then you have instilled confidence in the work force. That is what we need right now to continue producing quality vehicles. If you have the work force worried about their future, what are the chances they care about now? They will be day dreaming about other careers, or worried about what they are going to do with their family. Do you want that same person on the Care line?
What happened to car guys in the automotive industry? Mr. Lutz and Mr. Welborn are great examples of what happens when you put car guys in the auto industry. The bean counters don’t help the company make a profit; they only tell you how much money you have. It’s the car guys (and gals) make the company profitable, so change where and how you look for people.
Finally, the reduction in UAW pay has been long needed. There is no reason a person needs to make that 28 dollars an hour for the simplified task that they do. For the more skilled jobs, I could see the bump in pay. Yet, for most jobs, that is over compensation for the task at hand. Many college graduates can’t find a job at that kind of pay, so where was the justification in the first place? It’s really about time someone got tough. There are too many weak people out there, and the company needs to weed them out. Don’t pay your workers for poor performance; give them an easier job with reduced pay or show them the exit. It’s the only way to survive now, and in the future
Watched the whole CNBC show last night. Patiently waited…look quickly! there’s a glimpse! But absolutely no mention…hmmmm…they mentioned all the others over and over, Pontiac, Buick, Caddilac, Chevrolet, even Daewoo…what’s missing here…oh yea!
S-A-T-U-R-N
Is GM not “Saving Saturn?”
‘Twas interesting how Mr. Wagoner neatly sidestepped Mr. LeBeau’s with such an elliptical response when asked whether Wagoner deserved his $16 million salary and should keep his job considering the loss of value of GM shares, and GM’s decreasing market share . Perhaps Mr. Wagoner is considering a career in politics.
I do admire Mr. Lutz for being such a straight shooter in his responses to LeBeau’s questions. Must be that old Marine Corps fighter pilot training coming forth. Too bad more of our business leaders and politicians didn’t have the same kind of military training and learned to be so forthright.
The segment on CNBC was very well put together. The comments from China and other places in the globe were truly refreshing. With our excellent workforce, we can easily be the best Global brand.
However, watching that segment also made me realize that people’s perception is still very slow to change. There is still a lot of that perception that”they talk the same old good talk, but let’s see what the cars look like”.
Nowhere do I see it more than with my own ethnic group- Asian Indians. The perception with the majority of the Asian-Indian car buyers (in US & in India) is that GM (or American in general) quality is very poor. The entry car for an Indian is the Civic/Corolla, and as they get more affluent, it grows into Acura/Camry/Lexus (or BMW/Benz for the luxury brands)!! I wish we had a good way to target those buyers, and get them to try GM vehicles. I definitely think that our vehicles have better quality, mileage, and features for the money than any of the other manufacturers. However, I struggle with how to do I translate that to my fellow car buyers…
I am looking forward to the next 100 years, and truly believe that we have the capability & know-how to create better cars for the future. Hopefully we can generate enough cash to pay for these and keep going for the next generation!
I didn’t see the CNBC piece, but I DID want to commend your advertising during the Olympics. As a Graphic Designer, I tend to over-analyze TV commercials since I am involved with advertising myself. The GM ads being shown during the Olympics are extremely well done. Particularly, the Chevy Volt ad showing gas stations being built, torn down, and eventually replaced with the Chevy Volt in a now empty, green field. The quality of the work in the ad is fantastic. The concept is powerful, and the message clear, which is that there are other choices that consumers will eventually have with newer, alternative propulsion powered cars.
To me, even if you don’t own a GM product, which I admittedly do not, the ads make a strong impression, and that’s precisely what GM needs to accomplish, which is first and foremost, re-introduce GM to the public in a totally new light. I can recall what seemed not that long ago when brands like Chevrolet were basically like good-ole-boy ads… “Like a Rock…” and so on. That it was transformed into the brand that represents innovation is a great direction that will surely pay off.
Anyhow, I just wanted to pay my compliments to you guys, and especially the agency or creative team that made these ads. Well done!
Allan Lavut ~ “The volt is an exciting car and I will be very interested in purchasing one once it’s available. I just hope that GM can come through with this.”
Allan,
Just have that $45,000 (or more) ready and GM will be more than happy to sell you one. Technology won’t be the killer on the Volt, but whether they bring it in at a good price point. In my opinion, unless they can get the price below $30k, only a few rich people and celebrities, and some really passionate techno-geeks will buy one.
@Dan Belcher: The Invita is not a new name. The Buick Invicta was a full-sized car produced by Buick Motor Division from 1959 to 1963. It was available as a 2-door convertible, 2-door hardtop,
4-door hardtop, and 4-door station wagon
Gary,
The majority of journalists seem to like nothing more than a Peyton-Place style scandal or stories of layoffs, bloodletting, quality foibles, or executive mistakes rather than focusing on the entire business. After all; the entire business is boring because it does not sell papers or get people recognized as “edgy” or “daring”. If they included the fact that GM’s quality was better than most of it’s peers, that it sold numerous vehicles that get great fuel economy and that it has a hybrid full size truck that gets the same fuel economy as a Camry with a 4-cylinder engine. Those facts get in the way of printing dirt that sells papers and gets you noticed.
I lost 2/3rds of the value on a 2003 Vue VTI when I traded it in 2006, my chevy venture’s motor seized and got nearly nothing for the van. I currently own a Blazer, Saab and Honda. I’m pouring a lot of money into both GM products and really need a new car, what incentive do I have to help you, I really can’t say that gm stood behind any of the products that I have bought. Why should I help save GM?
I’ve found a real love-hate sentiment towards GM when I talk to friends and family about this company. It seems everyone has an opinion of what GM is doing wrong and what they should do to fix things. They feel a personal connection. I can’t help but feel that they want to root for GM but haven’t been given anything to root for. We’re the home team with a chance at winning the play-offs but fans have been disappointed before so they hesitate. I hope we can continue to hit more home-runs such as the Malibu and CTS and maybe they’ll start to believe again. Our fans are out there…… Just gotta get em back to the ballpark.
“Saving GM” was a fair and balanced piece of journalism, which I would have expected from Phil Le Beau. Too many of the other New York based automotive writers should be doing restaurant reviews. They have no concept about what is going on in the auto industry today. And the GM TV ads during the Olympics are very good, but PLEASE drop the Escalade commercial with the fellow stating that if it had a bathroom, he’d live in it. I cannot imagine a propective buyer in that dempgraphic responding positively to that one.
Mr. Lutz,
I watched the CNBC special “Saving GM.”
Their journalism showed an improvement and the program was informative. It was generally well produced, much better than other CNBC programs tend to be. It was forward looking which was good. The profile of GM’s people and facilities was good. Your profile was very good. The profile of Mr. Wagoner in China was also very good. Their profile of GM’s new products was good.
The good part was that it shared with the public the same confidence that GM enthusiasts have for GM, its people, and its leaders.
The GM cars looked excellent.
The opinions by outsiders were questionable. I don’t share the JD Power representative’s favorable opinions of Honda and Toyota. The foreign competition has had serious quality issues, which weren’t advised of by the so called quality rating organizations. I would like to have put the J.D Power Representative on the spot with question like, what about steering recall for which Toyota was investigated for an alleged cover-up? What about Honda’s massive transmission recalls and complaints by Honda/Acura owners regarding transmissions. Where were the quality raters and consumer groups then? Hiding perhaps. And where was the national media?
I don’t share the opinions of those interviewed on the Toyota lot. Toyota interior has never been as nice as interior on comparable GM models.
GM’s market share slide and sales of cars in the U.S. has been style related. Based on experience, I feel that GM quality through the decades has always bested the foreign compeition in general with the exception of a few low end models.
CNBC asked good questions of Mr. Wagoner which he answered very well.
While I don’t have the information available to GM’s top execs, I feel that GM might consider taking additional restructing steps early, like selling off Saab Opel, and getting out of Europe all together. Sell Saab Opel for a premium with the Euro trading higher and pump the investment into the US market.
Do what it takes to save GM, the company is so important to America. Focus the efforts on North America, Asia, and Australia. GM enthusiasts really want GM to restore its profitability, since we value GM vehicles most of all and we support GMs recent decisions. I also feel that GM has untapped resources like expanding Cadillac’s offerings vertically and horizontally with new styles, special names/looks from Oldmobile like the Toronado, the 1977 Cutlass Supreme, and the Aurora. These model names could still be sold at a Pontiac Builck GMC dealership, making Olds models a part of Buick. It would excite GM enthusiats to see a new Riviera.
Make additional health care cuts earlier rather than later. After you’re making a profit, you can change your mind.
These steps might help GM bring more great products to showrooms in America. Enthusiasts already foresaw without seeing the numbers, that the Malibu, the Enclave, and the Pontiac G6 are winners. We can tell they are selling without a weekly report. We know they can sell much more when the public becomes more aware of them.
GM commercials are finally featuring comparative advantages for fuel economy and quality. But why did it take a fuel crisis to advertise that?
If GM’s commercials had already informed people, they wouldn’t fall for the noise from the foreign competition.
Gary Dikkers, well said! Honestly, anything not coming from Mr Lutz or Mr Waggoner directly sounds as if it’s been washed through both legal and marketing departments at least six times before a single word is uttered or printed. How are we, or the press supposed to take anyone other than the top two guys at GM seriously if all that everyone else at GM does is issue forth heavily sanitized statements? We don’t get that much from Ford or Chrysler. Why are the other people from GM so afraid to speak with the candor that we see from Mr Lutz?
I think that this shows that GM needs a change in structure, philosophy and culture. Business people who are also “Car people” need to be running things. People who understand that GM is in the business of building cars and trucks, and not brands. I’ve said it before, and I’ll keep on saying it until Mr Lutz and Mr Waggoner listen: Marketing people should not be in charge. Their only concern should be to advise (ie: we need a car with these features), to sell the cars, and to shamelessly promote both GM and the divisions and companies that make up GM. Brand management doesn’t work in this business, and it’s one of the few leftovers from the 80’s that GM hasn’t gotten rid of completely. Why?
“My I point out that when journalists are uninformed, the primary cause would be GM’s public affairs office. Almost any journalist would like nothing better than to get the facts straight from you, Mr Wagoner, or a knowledgeable spokesperson speaking on your behalf — a spokesperson that actually knows what he or she is talking about, and one who gives facts instead of trying to spin things GM’s way.”
Please spare us the lecturing. Many auto journalists have an agenda before they ever write an article. What people need to understand is that auto reviewers or auto industry reporters need to keep their personal feelings out of their stories. Unfortunately, that rarely happens these days and we get lots of articles and TV segments that are riddles with half truths and hyperbole that make it seem like EVERY decision GM makes is bad and every decision made by Honda and Toyota is sound. You wont see much media coverage of how Scion and Lexus are struggling this year or how Toyota’s trucks aren’t doing any better than GM’s. You also won’t read anything about Acura’s sales plunge and how the new Pilot isn’t selling. You will read plenty of coverage about any and every sales decline or problem GM faces. In fact, most media reports on Toyota’s recent sales declines have simply attributed the lack of success to lack of hybrid availability. No mention of truck and luxury car sales.
I saw the program and thought it was very interesting. Its not often you get an in depth look at what GM’s doing behind the scenes like that. I thought the people interviewed at the Toyota dealership came off as ignorant and uninformed but I suspect many Toyota loyalists are the same way. Anyone claiming that GM interiors have parts that fall off in your hands and reek of lack of quality probably hasnt been in a GM product in 10 years or more. The 80s (and even early 90s) were a long time ago and people are doing themselves a disservice by not considering ALL the competitive products on the market today. Americans are typically slow to catch on and the slow acceptance of improved quality of GM products is just one more example of that. It’s amazing that people often say they wont reward GM (or others) with their hard earned money for a product that’s lacking and yet when GM offers top notch product those same people still won’t lend any consideration to those products because of what GM made 25 years ago. As far as I’m concerned what each manufacturer offered 25 years ago is irrelevant when it comes to a new car purchase.
Mr. Lutz I have a question regarding the reduction of higher waged line workers with lower waged ones as were shown in this special. While I understand and accpet this change I’m curious how quality will still be met on the line. Its quite simple in my mind that the guy who made 32$ an hour simply cares more and would be more attentive to quality, where as the 14$/hour guy just might not care enough causing quality issues. What steps are being done to keep our quality level where is it and even increase it while we move to lower cost workers?
Steven: ~ “The Invicta is not a new name.”
You are most certainly correct Steven.
A British car company has been using the name Invicta since 1925. Invicta Car Company
Once upon a time I thought that you, Bob, would be GM’s savior. Now, I am convinced it s time for you to step down, along with Waggoner. Your intransigent views on the changing market is a wonder to behold. Your company has wasted billions of shareholder dollars and wasted the goodwill that 70 years built up because of your ideas of the transportation needs of the consumer. GM KNEW that the products you have been making (trucks, SUVs and truly forgettable CARS) were not keeping pace with the competition, yet you continued to make them. Certain followers of your blamed the union, when you know that they have no input into what your managers approve. The Cobalt? The new Malibu? anew Camaro? (I admit I want one) Now just to set the record straight, I bought a new Malibu. A 2 LT with the four speed tranny and 4Cyl. I bought it because it truly was the best vehicle in every area. Itest drove everything and some twice before i bought it. I still like it. IT MAY be the car that turns GM around. BUT there were problems. Two tires had to be replaced. The dealership scratched one of the wheels, and because of that, I found a different dealer for my service. Which brings me to one of your problems. Some of your dealerships are not as good as your product is becoming. It is time for a complete rerwrite of your business plan.
Your dealerships should be run like Saturn dealerships. You need to operate like Warren Buffett does. If your Chevy Dealer wants to continue to sell your product, make them conform to a new set of rules. Hire an architect to design a new showroom for each of the remaining three brands, and make them stun the senses. Look at a Porsche showroom and that is what a Cadillac showroom should look like. ALL of them. Scratched wheels should not happen at any of your dealerships.
The three remaining US brands should be..
Chevrolet
Cadillac
Saab/Saturn
(Buick/Daewoo would be the Asian brand)
The agreements with the other dealers should be torn up and offer them a GMTRUCK/ Certified GM used car dealership that would also be a GM Mr. Goodwrench Service facility.
Build factories here again. Bring over diesels, and keep you momentum up on your alternative fuel efforts.
Saab/Saturn could be the US source for your excellent Euro products, and they should be here NOW.
Too bad you let Fiat go, I always thought they were an unused asset.
Bring out the new Cruze and Beat. Let the US consumer decide what they will buy, and then make
the cars.
You need to hire somebody in marketing that knows cars.
The Cobalt is ok, but ok isn’t good enough in that market. Put the SS package as an option in your small and midsize offerings. A Malibu or Aura with that blown 2.L would really sell, and the thing is, YOU know it will! YOU know that it will be a hit. So why isn’t it done?
I sometime wonder what GM is doing. Is is giving up? Is it trying to transform itself? GM finally makes world class engines, has the best designers, yet is still in trouble. WHY is that Bob?
C’MON!!!
Sheth said: “Many auto journalists have an agenda before they ever write an article.”
What would be their motivation to do that? If a journalist doesn’t have creditability he or she doesn’t have anything. Their jobs depend on getting the facts right.
It sounds as though you have an agenda when it comes to auto journalists.
“You wont see much media coverage of how Scion and Lexus are struggling this year or how Toyota’s trucks aren’t doing any better than GM’s. You will read plenty of coverage about any and every sales decline or problem GM faces.”
Do you think that just might be because GM is an American company and the welfare of the communities hosting GM assembly plants and American jobs depend on how well GM does?
Dear Mr. Lutz,
I have been a big fan of yours since your days at Chrysler. I felt that when you came to GM that finally a real car guy was going to make some necessary changes. You said in the broadcast that you can see if a car will be a big hit without relying on market research or focus groups. I am pleased with what you have done while here and hope that you will continue pushing GM in this direction for many years to come. I am currently going through my second plant closing due to GM not being able to stabilize this company. This has been very difficult for me and my family. The thing that bothered me about the broadcast was the excitement that Mr. Wagoner had about the emerging markets. It would have been nice if he showed as much excitement about North America. It is easy to manage a company when things are going well but the true great leaders shine when things are tough. I really want Mr. Wagoner to succeed. I realize that the auto industry as a whole and GM in particular have been hit by a perfect storm; rising fuel, economic issues, our legacy costs, and the resulting shift in buyers demands. Regardless of all of this we need to push our quality achievements harder and also push that buying a GM car is not only a good investment but also good for America. Show people where the money goes from GM cars as opposed to the foreign autos. Let people know how each automakers job impacts the jobs of others and their communities. So what if we step on some toes. We are in the fight for our lives and it is time we act like it. We need a take no prisoners’ attitude. Nothing should be off the table. Be aggressive towards the imports. We can take them.
Bob, I’d say the Malibu is a hit. Maybe even a smash hit. It’ll take a little more time for people to notice, but I still get whiplash from trying to look it over whenever I see one pass my old Jeep. And that’s a mid-size, “boring” family car. If you ever made one with a manual and AWD, I’d be on it like white on rice.
But for now I’m trying to find money for a Saab Aero XWD.
Hey Bob – I was watching the Olympics yesterday, and had a thought. While GM has good commercials so far, it would be cool to see you and/or Rick standing with China LaCrosse and a US LaCrosse next to each other. You could talk about your success in China and the Buick heritage there. Then, walk over to show the 2010 LaCrosse, for what I understand would be the same car for both markets. You could play up on the One World theme of the Olympics. It would have been classy. Food for thought!
Eric P
I work for a Chevy dealer.Been doing it since 1986.Also only drive GM cars. My newest one is a 2007 HHR which I love. I think gm is on the right track for sure but to wait until 2010……
What are dealers supposed to do until this Volt comes out? Customers are so turned off by GM cars lately. We are a LARGE auto group and sales have plummeted. Dealers cant survive until a Volt comes out,what if it does not sell? I love the Chevy cars but people seem to love Toyota and Honda more.
You guys are getting killed online,in the press,on tv…I dont know if you have any idea how much animosity some people have towards GM cars,its actually sickening to me…you need to up your marketing and saturate people with your products.Let them know we have fuel efficient cars also! Hit them back where they are hitting you. I love my HHR,I get 32 mpg with it….yet……its NEVER mentioned anywhere about GM fuel effiicient cars.Just yesterday on line,Consumer Reports listed top 10 fuel efficient cars…..not one was a GM car!! And most listed got less mileage than a GM smaller car. No Aveo listed,no HHR,No Impala or Malibu…….This is what is hurting you guys badly.People read that and bam….no GM sales! You need to start hitting them below the belt. Most of the cars listed were shown as getting 27-32 MPG(except for a Prius). As I see GM dealers get slower,sales dropping…..I am getting nervous….I dont want to lose my job because GM has not supplied cars that can sell. 2010 is a long way away to hope on a Volt. Are there any other plans for new cars for Chevy coming out?
Come on GM fight back and take back GM again.
Mr. Lutz
You have to listen to people like Jan Bayus, it is so true, my Neighbor sold his prius and bought a Cobalt and loves it unit the dealer scrached it and gave him a hard time, here in so. cal.these dealers are dinasors and don’t care, (ie) Chevy, Pontiac,. The dealer were I bought my new CTS is a DISCRACE boken floors dated circa 1960 and I vowed never to buy from there and we did, reluctently and they said there remodeling soon yeah checks in the mail, that being said it was the old man who sold us the car, knowledgable and patient, they are competing with Lexus hold them to some kind of standard and forget about me filling out the survey when it comes to the facility.
Thanks for listening Bob
Forever GM, Bluebaby
CNBC program was informative and Phil Lebeau did a good and complete review.
The one reason why GM does well in China is this: Mr. Power from Consumer Reports cannot influence their sales since it has very little influence there. CR have been on the big three’s back the last three decades, sometime rightly so. What is really annoying is this:
For the first time in along time they recommended the Chevrolet Pick-up in their top 10 (2008 issue) with this mention:
“The Toyota Tundra outscored the Silverado in our tests, but first year reliability of the 4wd, V8 version was below average”
In essence they said that they would have prefered to recommend the Tundra instead. Also, the rating was not just below average; it was much worse than average, which is the lowest rating possible.
Bob,
Perhaps the show should have been stretched a bit to include saving GM and its suppliers. I’d bet most of the bloggers here (except those in Michigan) don’t realize just how many companies have gone bankrupt at the hands of the Detroit 3. Fritz Henderson has admitted in numerous press releases that costs are going up for raw materials, so GM needs to raise prices. Not that we like it, but I think we all understand that and accept it as a result of changing economies. Why then doesn’t that logic hold true for your suppliers? Instead of working as partners, the GM purchasing staff demands cost concessions – even in the face of known rising raw material prices. In fact, future business is held hostage unless the suppliers concede to this demand. As a result, many have filed for Chapter 11, and GM offers no help. Instead, they take back their tooling and look for new suppliers upon which to feed.
Don’t you think that is pathetic Bob? How can you expect to foster any kind of relationship when you treat the very reason for your quality improvements like dog$h%^t?
Saturn Bob- You might want to check out this article from Jill Lajdziak over on ImSaturn regarding the future of Saturn:
http://imsaturn.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2033334%3ABlogPost%3A42511
-Alicia Dorset, blog editor
~ “…regarding the future of Saturn.”
Isn’t the future of Saturn spelled O-P-E-L?
“Do you think that just might be because GM is an American company and the welfare of the communities hosting GM assembly plants and American jobs depend on how well GM does?”
I love it how people like GAry want to have it both ways. If I were to say “Buy American” Gary would undoubtedly point out how many American jobs are provided by foreign automakers and then tell me that they have been adding jobs while the Big 3 have been cutting them. As soon as I say there is inadequate coverage of the failures of the Asian automakers Gary tells me that’s because they aren’t siginificant to the US economy like GM. I think everyone here is aware of the fact that GM’s is much smaller than it used to be from an employment standpoint. We also know that large numbers of “import” cars are built right here in the US and foreign automakers employ many thousands at their plants. If poor GM sales are bad for the US economy than so are poor sales from Toyota and Nissan.
It never ceases to amaze me how folks who have nothing but ill will towards GM will waste so much time posting here time and again. If you think every decision GM makes is poor and every executive working for GM is incompetent it would just be easier to buy from someone else and stop attacking the company on this blog.
” I love my HHR,I get 32 mpg with it….yet……its NEVER mentioned anywhere about GM fuel effiicient cars”
Most of GM’s latest ads mention fuel economy. They are running ads during the Olympics as we speak that CLEARLY state Chevy has more 30mpg+ models than Toyota or Honda as well as an ad featuring the Malibu Hybrid. I have seem similar ads for BPG. Once the 2009 Aura is available Saturn needs to really push the 33mpg of the Aura and state that is superior to the Camry and Accord.
I think people complaining about the condition of dealerships or the quality of service need to realize that dealers are independent enterprises. There are good and bad dealers for virtually every car brand in the US. Saturn and Lexus may be exceptions but I can assure you that there are many average dealers who sell Honda and Toyota.
Rum Doodle,
Why are you so adament about changing the name of Saturn to Opel? I’d be willing to bet more people in the US know the name Saturn than Opel.
Remarkable statements from a Toyota-executive:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080812/AUTO01/808120448/1148
Bob, that’s the first thing about the documentary that I noticed, too! I obviously don’t need to explain to you how refreshing it is to watch something so balanced….especially when the subject is General Motors!
I want to thank you too, Bob; for you’re frankness in the one-on-one interview. Not many executives are up to the task — and I tell you, it irritates the heck out of me when I have to listen to someone beating around the bush. Just…talk! So thanks!
As for Rick Wagoner…I saw your face when Phil asked you why you still had a job. Let it be known that I did notice your reaction to the question, and I feel your pain.
I liked the piece on the Camaro…it’s very interesting how much focus is being aimed at details like 1mm of the roof line. I’m quite confident, based on a simple display like that, that this car will be even better in quality than the Malibu – A tough bar to pass!! You guys are gonna hit a homerun with that car!
I liked the Volt piece, too. I think you’re really making headway with the media in that they no longer believe this is a joke. Kudos, you’ve done the impossible! I really hope this car hits the market with a splash so big it drowns “Company-T”!! So good luck! (but I have no doubts; never did.)
PS– to the fastlane editors; is it possible to get the “leave a reply” box placed right beneath the writeup? It would eliminate the inconvienence of scrolling down 60, sometimes 100s of replys just to leave your own. Thanks!
Is this video available on-line? Can someone show the URL to the actual video (not only the home web site)? My quick search in CNBC did not yield desired result.
You want GM to survive? Then fire Wagoner and get someone as CEO who gets it. Its obvious Wagoner just doesn’t have a clue.
Cases in point:
1.Cobalt left to rot on the vine without major improvements just like the Cavalier. Not coming close to matching the competitions content-no telescopic steering wheel, awful seats, no rear independent suspension, etc. Steering is atrocious.
2. Aveo is garbage, just an awful car trying to match up with obviously superior Honda Fit, Nissan Versa, etc.
3. Name changing and more name changing. You guys managed to bury Buick with your insipid name changing, now you change the name of the Cobalt to the Cruze!? Dumbest name ever. You want to change a name? Aveo should be changed to Metro. You want to change the name of the Cobalt? Change it to Monza or Nova. CRUZE!? Good lord.
Chevy Metro, Monza (or Nova), Camaro, Malibu, Impala, Equinox, Traverse, Suburban, Colorado, Silverado, Corvette (bring back the stingray name for higher model), Volt.
The Colorado is awful and needs to be redone ASAP and NOT by Isuzu-you guys know how to build trucks just do it yourself. Silverado needs a new front end and a hybrid.
4. You design the Beat yet don’t have the foresight to design it for NA right out of the box. Now that small cars are desperately needed here you can’t sell it here! Absolutely moronic-this one alone should get the CEO canned immediately but the boneheads on your board keep Wagoner in place. Unbelievable.
5. What the heck are you doing with Pontiac and Saturn? Saturn has no cache and too few dealers. You may as well change the name to Opel, kill the Outlook, and bundle Opel with Buick and GMC. Pontiac should be killed off. The ‘G’ nomenclature basically killed the brand. Again with the idiotic name changes. Now, Buick’s recent names do need to be changed since the products they were named for are mediocre at best.
Opel Corsa, Astra, Insignia, Meriva, Antara, GT
Buick Skylark, Invicta, Electra, Enclave, Riviera (or Bengal)
6. Cadillac-CTS is fine but everything else is lame. Instead of the SRX how about a CTX? Larger crossover could be called DTX.
BTS-smaller RWD Sedan and Coupe
CTS sedan, coupe , wagon
CTX small crossover
DTS Larger Flagship sedan
DTX Larger crossover hybrid
XLR-redesign it please
Escalade Hybrid only
I would also consider using the concept cars names-Evoq, Provoq, etc.
Not so hard, is it?
And all of your vehicles should be E-85 standard across the board.
Gary Dikkers
“Do you think that just might be because GM is an American company and the welfare of the communities hosting GM assembly plants and American jobs depend on how well GM does?”
Did you ever think that if the quality issues that have plagued Toyota, Honda, and the like were brought to the attention of the public the way our errors are maybe the perception of Japanese perfection would be altered.
Keep in mind, it people continue to buy non American company vehicles there will be no US auto industries and no jobs.
No one is perfect so let’s see everyone’s errors not just one side. Remember Consumer Report is no longer going to give Toyota an automatic recommondation as in the past
Oh come on Gary.. If journalists careers depended on getting the facts right over half of them would be out of work tomorrow.
Dear Mr. Lutz,
A very fair program indeed..especially the part where they mention the eternal denial mode that GM’s top management has always been in. It is very important for GM to become a dynamic corporation with a vision that goes beyond 2 years. We need to foresee 10 years from now. I keep coming up with ideas on making GM a better company, as I am very passionate about our capabilities.
One thing is for sure, you have chnaged the way our products are made and GM should be very thankfull to you. I am the financial analyst who priced and strategized the launch of my baby ” THE CHEVY MALIBU” in Canada. We need more people like you, who are assionate about the product. If we make great products and keep our employees happy, in 5 years we will see customers coming back. Further, every GM employee needs to become a brand ambassador of the company. I have already convinced 5 people to buy our Malibu. Also, slowly my friends are getting convinced that GM’s quality is up there with the best, the question is longterm reliability.
Thank you very much for changing our company in the right direction. If you ever get to come to Canada..all I would want to do is to say Hi and THANKS BOB !
Mr. Lutz,
I think of myself as a “GM Guy” but I’ll be danged if I can find a GM car that I’m willing to put my hard earned dollars into. I’ve owned a great sampling of GM history, mostly Chevy from 57 Belairs, ‘58 Impalla, ‘59 Impalla, ‘67 Camaro, GMC Jimmy, Chevy 1/2 ton 4X4, 5 Corvettes and a station wagon or two. Outside of the Corvette, GM totally lacks excitement. Sky and Soltice somehow miss the mark as too big and heavy, the rest of the line up is either just plain boring or way too costly.
I watch you on “Saving GM” when you pointed out the benchmark red, ‘59 Eldo convertible and then tried to tell us the black 4-door CTS is just as exciting. No way is any 4-door sedan an exciting car. Certainly not visually.
I think GM, like Ford and Chrysler have made at least 2 basic mistakes. Too many models within a brand and no excitement. Look at Honda and Toyota, and I’m sure you have. Honda has two models, Accord and Civic, Toyota has Camry and Corolla. Nissan has 4 and they don’t do as well as Honda and Toyota. Think back to the glory days of GM. There was one model for Chevy with various levels of trim and engines. Same for Ford. Think of the dollars that could be saved by standardizing production sheet metal and mechanics.
Throw in the convertibles and hardtops that had visual appeal and drew customers in. Sure, some customers came in to see the convertible, but the glamor of the convertible rubbed off on the sedans. Smart marketing ! Don’t show a black 4-door sedan and tell me it’s exciting, it aint !
One more comment. The last local auto show I visited, Buick was featuring their newly reskinned LaSabre with a new name that is so bland I cannot even recall what it was. The spokesperson was a woman about 65 years old ! She stood before the new model (beige 4-door sedan) and with a streight face touted it’s youth appeal. My 75 year old father-in-law was impressed, I was not ! At least Ford had very young and attractive women on their stand. Where do you think the largest group of people were?
Until GM catches on I’ll keep my Honda’s (3) and my ‘86 Vette.
Hi Bob,
It’s Time for Oil & Automotives to work together
by MrArbitrage
Oil companies are spending large amounts of money advertising on television, radio and billboards. They are trying to win brand loyalty by extolling the virtues of their gasoline’s cleansing properties! It’s GASOLINE, give me a freaking break! At $4.00 per gal, people are looking for the cheapest price down to the penny.
SOLUTION: Big Oil, eliminate that small fortune in advertising that is wasted. We know you are there because we see you on every street corner. We don’t care about your octane at this juncture.
Consumers know how much gas they consume every week as they fill their tanks. It’s a simple equation. They can calculate that average and extrapolate their annual average gas consumption per family or household.
You want them to loyally buy gas from you? Issue annual contracts in which consumers commit to buy a specific monthly or annual amount of gas from say Exxon, Shell or Chevron stations or stations supplied by your companies. This would be like a cellular phone service contract.
How would you motivate consumers to commit to such a contract? That begs the age old question that every consumer needs answered – “WHAT”S IN IT FOR ME?”
What is in it for the consumer with wireless phone contracts? Usually it involves a competitive rate and a very low price on a high quality phone. Sometimes they give the phone for free if the contract is long enough or large enough.
So instead of “Big Oil” spending a fortune on useless commercials and billboards, they can procure multi-year contracts with consumers by partnering up with GM. GM would sell the gasoline contracts to car buyers with the motivator being a DEEPLY discounted price on the car. This would be especially effective with the gas guzzling inventory.
GM would be paid by the oil company for each contract. This would be a win-win. The consumer would not be committing to specific price – but rather a specific MARGIN. It would guarantee the oil producer/refiner a specific margin like an adjustable loan does to a lender, for example Prime + (whatever %) over cost. It also guarantees the producer/refiner a loyal customer for a period of a year or more. (The longer the contract, the lower the car price)
It also guarantees the consumer that they won’t be stuck paying a higher gas price than everyone else if oil were to fall dramatically during the contract. Their price would fall as well. They would just be committed to buy a particular brand at a specified percentage over cost.
The technology is here. They issue a credit card that keeps track of their spending as they swipe it at the pumps as most people already do. The consumer doesn’t need to go around looking for the station with the lowest price because if one day they happen to be in an area where prices are higher, they will pay their contract price, not the price on the station’s marquis. The stations will benefit from increased traffic and sell more products at their convenience stores, which is how gas retailers make their profits anyway.
This is a strategic alliance that would make sense for oil companies and automotive companies because their products are quite correlated.
It could work even more efficiently if Big Oil were to acquire the troubled automotives. As one company they would have more flexibility with prices.
For more on that subject read my column “A Big Oil Bailout of the Big 3”
at http://tableofwisdom.com/Big_Oil_Bailout_-_Big_3.html
Contact: MrArbitrage@tableofwisdom.com
“And for those of you who saw the program, let us know what you thought.”
Why did Mr. Wagoner have so much trouble answering Mr. LeBeau’s question of whether he should have foreseen the increase in fuel prices that caused the market for SUVs to implode, and whether Mr. Wagoner deserves his $16 million salary, especially when considering the loss in share value to GM stockholders?
There is a great article by Detroit News that marks GM’s centennial celebration on Sept 16 at
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080813/AUTO01/808130486/1148. It’s such a great article that everyone should read it. With market share hovering around 20% from a height of 52% in the 1960’s, GM has no choice but MUST kill more brands: either selling them or killing them outright. Selling Pontiac, Saturn, GMC to the Indian, Chinese and Russian automakers is the BEST solution. GM then could become a contractor for these companiers. But that does not mean GM will supply next-generation platforms to these companies, just the current gen. Between the choices of plunking down billions to support these brands, or selling them to save billions, I think the choice is pretty much clear, IF GM wants to prosper for another 100 years.
Bob, I did watch the TV piece on GM. I agree with others that you are the reason the company has a focus. We know that you are the one driving product. After all if you want make something, and sell it, you’ve got to make something people want to buy. Its all about the product. Most Americans WANT to buy American. Keep up the great work and find a successor worthy of your desk when you retire. Also, bring that gorgeous Insignia Wagon to America! You mentioneda wagon in an email response to me a few months back. G8, is it coming?
Al H.
I almost liked you post, till the end. Making fun of that Cadillac they featured, calling it un-exciting, then you say you drive an 86 vette. That Caddy would run laps around your vette. Now theres some driving excitement. 86 vette specs 230 hp lbs/hp 14.26.1 08 Cadillac 304 hp lbs/hp 12.74.1..WITH A V6! and a 4 door.
SteveG
I agree with alot of what you are saying. The Colorado was the biggest POS I ever owned. Seats were uncomfortable and interior was terribly cheap. Had multiple steering problems and engine ticked constantly which I was told “wasn’t” a problem. Not good news when you know of all the head problems colorados had. all under 30,000.
Aveo is a terrible car, not half the car the Geo Metro was. The Geo felt peppier (if thats possible) and got much better mileage. The facelift is more like a facedown. A malibu front end that doesnt fit it what it looks like. The cobalt isn’t really all that bad, expecially the SS version. I was quite happy riding in a friends base cobalt. I didn’t really notice any issues, except when I looked at the paint. Now the dealership is saying its rail road dust..right. I say keep the Cobalt name, cruze is dumb, and don’t disgrace the Nova name anymore than what they did in the 80’s. Still havent figured out what the deal with alpha-numeric name is, its just dumb. We need names, not codes.
I couldn’t agree more on the importance of quality. I guess that’s a good thing since I’m the one whose feet are held to the fire. I’ve got to tell you that it’s not cost or quality, it’s cost AND quality. As we ready a new vehicle for launch, we conduct regular reviews of supplied parts – both how they look and how they perform. Plus, we validate the parts by testing them to fail. Yes, we test them until they fail so we know they will stand up to the test of time.
Quality is all-encompassing. Quality is built into all that we do. From robust designs to engineering specifications to assembly processes and everything in between, quality plays a starring role. For instance, GM has a team of quality experts at every plant and on every product team. And when it comes to the men and women working to put the cars and trucks together, they are some of the hardest working people you’d want to meet.
Quality is the ante in the vehicle market. There’s no choice in the matter. Quality is a must. And GM is getting better every day. We’re working hard to make every vehicle launch with higher quality than the last. The 2008 Chevrolet Malibu is one of the most successful launches in the industry in terms of quality. And, you know, at GM, quality doesn’t stop with the product. You see, it’s not about any one thing, it’s about everything. Your experience, in and around the product is paramount. Let me assure you that we have some of the best dealers in the industry and we work together to consistently improve your entire ownership experience.
The jury is still out. I guess it always will be because this is a journey, not a destination. I can assure you we’re working hard to keep improving quality. In 2006, the number of warranty repairs was reduced by 40 percent over five years. In 2007 alone, warranty repairs were reduced nearly 14 percent over the previous year. You know what that means … less time waiting for a repair at the dealership and more time to enjoy your car or truck and other things that are important to you.
I’ll share a secret with you: we’re on track to post double-digit percentage improvements in our warranty repairs again this year. I’ll check back in and let you know if we make it.
~ “In 2006, the number of warranty repairs was reduced by 40 percent over five years. In 2007 alone, warranty repairs were reduced nearly 14 percent over the previous year. You know what that means …”
An impressive downward trend. I hope that means you will start offering longer, more comprehensive warranties. Something like, “Buy a GM car and if anything–and we mean anything–goes wrong with it, drive it in to your local GM dealer and they’ll fix it at no cost to you for the first ten years you own the car.”
I’m sure you don’t have enough confidence in the quality and durability of your cars to do that.
Sheth said:
“I think people complaining about the condition of dealerships or the quality of service need to realize that dealers are independent enterprises. There are good and bad dealers for virtually every car brand in the US. Saturn and Lexus may be exceptions but I can assure you that there are many average dealers who sell Honda and Toyota.”
The dealers may be independent enterprises, but that doesn’t mean that GM can’t impose standards and procedures that the dealers are required to follow if they want to keep their franchise. GM proved with Saturn that the sales experience, and the service experience can be top notch. The other GM dealers don’t need to follow Saturn’s one price sales strategy for it to work either. I’ve already seen some Chevy and Cadillac dealers start using the Saturn approach on their own to great effect. This simply works, and should be required across the board at all GM dealerships.
I want to ask Bob Lutz GM Vice Chairman, if GM will focus on Energy saving technology in 2008 and 2009?
How many cost will GM research itself? If it is ok, will GM buy the unique energey saving technology?
Reporter Linda
Al H;
You can’t be taken seriously if you drive Hondas and then complain that GM has no exciting vehicles outside of the corvette. You are a classic example of a dedicated complainer that really cannot be satisfied by GM. I would say the CTS (including upcoming coupe), Camaro, XLR, G8, Solstice GXP, Aura and Cobalt SS are examples of exciting GM products. What excitement have you found in Honda’s lineup? The Accord? The Pilot? Give me a break. This is why GM execs likely ignore half the comments on this site. People are not being objective or realistic. GM is so far ahead of Honda when it comes to design and powertrains it’s not even open for debate.
“Most Americans WANT to buy American. ”
Totally inaccurate. Most americans refuse to change their long held opinions regardless of the facts. The average Toyota or HOnda owner hasn’t owned a GM product in 10 years or more but will still tell you with confidence that American cars aren’t made as well as Japanese cars. Stop assuming the American public is well informed. They are not. If I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard someone who has little recent experience with a domestic bash the quality of domestic cars I would be able to fill my gas tank.
“I hope that means you will start offering longer, more comprehensive warranties. ”
Their warranty protection is superior to Toyota’s or Honda’s. What’s your point? BTW, let me know when Honda starts offering roadside assistance during the warranty period. Rum Doodle you are nothing more than an unabashed GM hater who has nothing positive to contribute here. Give it a rest. I have noticed that everyone who criticizes everything GM does is guilty of embracing double standards. People want GM to expand it’s warranty coverage when the supposed leaders in quality offer LESS warranty protection and do not offer loaner cars as part of their standard warranty.
“The dealers may be independent enterprises, but that doesn’t mean that GM can’t impose standards and procedures that the dealers are required to follow if they want to keep their franchise. ”
Do you expect Toyota and Honda to do the same? The import dealers I have visited have not been impressive at all. I have been harrassed and misinformed at such dealerships and nothing I have experienced has made me want to purchase one of their products.
Please read the most recent Car Online website (UK) to look at what GM should be making–the Vauxhall Insignia (Saturn???) Sport Touring. Why hasn’t GM looked at building a mid-sized station wagon to compete with VW and Volvo. The Saab 9-3 wagon just doesn’t cut it with most families like mine who would love to support our relatives and friends who work at GM Oshawa but don’t want a truck/CUV/SUV. An entire generation has grown up since GM last offered a good station wagon. Get to it guys, time is running out!
Jamie
You can’t brag about the numbers without the facts, and as I said on another post, just because the warrenty repairs are going down, doesn’t mean the problems are not there. Service managers talking their way out of making the repair doesn’t mean things are getting better, only the consumer is getting dumber.
Gary Dikkers,
So you say that auto journalists report more about American auto company problems than foreign car problems because American car companies affect the communities more?
Are you admitting then that foreign transplants don’t really create American jobs after all?
You can’t have it both ways.
I am glad to see the focus on quality but surprised at the complexity of innovation. Instead of bootstrapping a miriad of devices to technology that is 100 years old, shouldnt there be an emphasis on reinventing the automobile engine itself? The engine, in its present “improved” form is going to cause untold quality problems because of the increased complexity necessary to increase mileage. GM needs more skunkworks and the ability to accept ideas from inventors while protecting them. It is impossible that all new ideas will come from inside their “box”. These days an inventor needs to absorb the complexity and financial constraints of patenting not just in the USA, but globally. GM’s policy of not keeping ideas confidential, endangers their ability to be patented outside the USA. They need a comprehensive new approach to idea management that can take advantage of pool of ideas here in the USA and develop them into new winning technology. Their financial and technical ability to do this quickly is an advantage in itself.
David said: “If journalists careers depended on getting the facts right over half of them would be out of work tomorrow.”
David,
Professional journalists who do not get their facts straight or make things up, don’t keep their jobs. Did you miss the high-profile cases in the NY Times and Washington Post the last few years where previously respected journalists lost their jobs and careers beause they made things up?
Don’t confuse true journalists– who do have a high professional standard to live up to–with bloggers and pundits. Bloggers and pundits often do have specific agendas and make things up or spin the facts to make ther case, but they aren’t journalists.
It looks as though on the “Saving GM” story both Wagoner and Lutz went out of their way to make sure Phil LeBeau got the truth straight from the horse’s mouth. That is the best way for any CEO or politician to make sure the facts gets out and tamp down speculation and guesswork.
As Mr. Lutz himself admitted, “I was impressed with the balance, the fairness, and the journalistic integrity of the entire piece.”
Hi Bob,
I’m puzzled why the Aveo and Cobalt are not fitted with 6-speed automatic or manual transmission, since that will presumably boost fuel effiiciency by 2mpg, right?
Ford is going to have two new global models, Fiesta and Focus. The Euro Focus and American Focus will share 90% of the parts and share one platform, as opposed to previous two platforms sharing only 20% of parts? Why can GM harmonize Corsa, and Aveo? Build it on the Corsa and share 90% of the parts. That way you can expect to have double-digit profit gain.
You should eliminate duplicate models, such as G5, G6 from Pontiac, and leave it with Solstice, G7 and G8. The integration of Saturn into BPG to form BPGS should be sped up. Speaking of model names, why can’t you have only Invicta instead of Buick LaCross for US, Allure for Canada, and Invicta for the rest? Standardizing on one name says advertising expenses and the stamping of nameplates.
There’s still some holes in the Chevrolet lineup. For example, how is the HHR selling? The compact crossover SUV market is one hot segment. The retro styled HHR can’t compete with Toyota RAV4, or Honda CR-V. The right product should be the Captiva. One drawback of Captiva is that it weights too much. It should be based on the same Cobalt platform as HHR. You should also have “exciting” products for Chevrolet, like a version of the Saturn Sky, and consider bringing back the Cavalier Coupe. Perhaps you should also have a version of the Geo Metro/Chevy Metro. It’s a fantastic fuel sipper that gets 40 MPG COMBINED!!!!!! Well, I really hope Ford will also bring over its Focus Convertible to the States. It’s time to give Sebring a run of their money!
Gary Dikkers,
Everyone is a journalists today, bloggers, pundits, etc. Guess who doesn’t like that. The liberal media is losing their monopoly, that’s why they are howling.
As noted above, the peripheral opinions presented in CNBC piece, “Saving GM” are not shared by GM enthusiasts. No GM enthusiasts were interviewed though, so that is where the slant becomes evident. There can always be some rented opinion by a quality rating agency. Even these organizations have agendas.
So what makes someone roaming the lot of a competitior newsworthy? Its not unless, the GM enthusiasts is given an opportunity to respond.
GM quality has always bested the competition, GM’s global volume has risen year after year. GM has outcompeted the foreign competition, their governments, and their banks, on their continents.
The questions asked of the CEO may have been timely questions, but GM enthusiasts can say even more, such as the foreign competition only makes their gains when the U.S economy is down. Where have the networks been on that score? Hiding perhaps?
One improved piece of journalism by CNBC is not enough.
Edwin said: “As noted above, the peripheral opinions presented in CNBC piece, “Saving GM” are not shared by GM enthusiasts. No GM enthusiasts were interviewed though, so that is where the slant becomes evident.”
Edwin,
By definition, a GM “enthusiast” could not offer an unbiased opinion. Wouldn’t there be “evident slant” had they included your views or those of some other “enthusiast?”
Best regards,
Gary Dikkers
Edwin offered, “Everyone is a journalists today, bloggers, pundits, etc. Guess who doesn’t like that. The liberal media is losing their monopoly, that’s why they are howling. ”
Blathering on the Internet does not a “journalist” make.
“GM quality has always bested the competition,…”
Then why have people abandoned GM in droves? It’s not their imaginations or the pressure from some liberal media, who rarely talk about cars anyway, it’s word-of-mouth and stats from respected srouces.
“GM’s global volume has risen year after year. GM has outcompeted the foreign competition, their governments, and their banks, on their continents.”
Dude… get away from your PC and read something reliable. GM is no longer #1. Read GM’s own reports. Look at their income statement.
Gary,
I was impressed with the CNBC piece but most journalism having anything to do with American auto companies is rife with sensationalism, negativism, and outright bias.
Where’s the reporting about:
Sludge filled engines?
Rusty frames?
The Tundra, engine, transmission, tailgate (probably unsafe), and the substandard frame they put under the truck?
Toyota’s utter failure to improve their truck fuel economy?
Sagging sales of the ill-fated Scion brand and it’s well-below-standard reliability and customer satisfaction?
All we hear when these things come to light from our “media” is the sounds of crickets chirping. By contrast to your post it usually takes a blogger or a post on a bulletin board to get some information out. The mainstream media is eating out of Toyota’s hand to the point that they ignore possible safety problems and product satisfaction issues.
“Dude… get away from your PC and read something reliable. GM is no longer #1. Read GM’s own reports. Look at their income statement.”
Most people measure “#1″ in terms of sales, not profits. If you are talking about profits than GM hasn’t been #1 for a long time. In terms of sales GM was still #1 as of last year although that may change. What people in America don’t seem to get is that GM is beating Toyota in Europe and China where the two are on level footing. Contrary to all the gloom and doom GM is still beating Toyota in the US too. GM is more hated in America than it is in foreign countries which is amazing. In the CNBC documentary they show how Chinese people feel that Buick and Chevy stand for quality while Americans are saying “knobs and parts fall off” on GM products. Also, anyone talking about marketshare needs to look at the European market. No one there has a share close to what GM had in the 60s and yet people do not call VW or MB lackluster automakers. Americans need to get over the notion that marketshare is the primary indicator of the relevance or competence of vehicles in the US market. Toyota and Honda have gained share because they have been constantly expanding into new segments in the US. Toyota and Nissan are now full line automakers that compete with GM in every single segment of the US market. When you have more competitors the market is sliced up into smaller pieces. It’s very possible that no automaker will ever have more than 20% marketshare going forward in the US market. That would be very similar to the situation in Europe.
“GM is more hated in America than it is in foreign countries which is amazing.”
Yes, that is amazing. Now why would that be? People don’t just decide to hate something without reason, do they?
Many of those people whom you claim hate GM probably had a cousin or uncle who worked at a GM assembly plant, or for a GM supplier, or at a GM dealership. Many probably had a grandfather or uncle who drove a GM product.
With GM so embedded in the American psyche, and with so many Americans having had some kind of experience with GM, what could have gone wrong that so many people now hate GM — or at least prefer cars built by other companies?
Figure that out and you’ll probably be next in line to replace Rick Wagoner as CEO.
Gary Dikkers,
By definition, the liberal media is less likely to offer an unbiased opinion.
A GM enthusiast can offer a factual opinion and is in a better position to rebut a falsehood than those who have a big title.
——-
Charlie H,
The liberal media has been so desperate for Toyota to have more sales, they repeat it then when it doesn’t happen its retracted year after year, a few times its been falsely claimed, and no one is paying attention anyway. How many years have they been trying? Since 9/11/01? Once again, the only time the foreign auto makers gain is when the U.S. economy is down. And where has the national media been on that score. Hiding perhaps?
Read some of pitiful articles lamenting the Infini’s M’s poor sales, it was like the auto media feeling sorry for themselves because no one cared for their promos for the foreign compeition.
Toyota only sells a couple of models anyway to a dwindling demographic, so don’t think they will last. And Toyotas numbers have come from their half owned subsidiary Daihatsu.
Don’t confuse GM’s increasing volume with market share like CNBC.
Yes, anyone can be a journalist. The professional part just means they are selling something that should be free anyway. Think of athletics – the great athletes don’t charge, they compete in events like the Olympics.
After all, aren’t journalists just those who couldn’t make it in business school or engineering? Producing something is an honest job, a car is something worth paying for.
Most people don’t read newpapers anymore, they just remove the grocery coupons.
Above, David said: “If journalists careers depended on getting the facts right over half of them would be out of work tomorrow.”
Yes, David is correct.
Here is an example:
The liberal media says that the U.S only has 3 % of the world’s oil reserves.
The Facts: The U.S and Canada have more oil than the Middle East, its not only off shore, its in the form of Oil Shale. Oil Shale can now be extracted at low costs which are much less than the price of imported oil with environmentally safe methods which do not require tapping water sources. Its called High Temperature Fuel Cell method.
The liberal media rails against ethanol:
The facts: Ethanol is competitve at $45/ barrel. The media ignores the benefits of sugar cane ethanol and cellulostic ethanol which are coming soon. The media ignores the 50 cent/gallon tax on imported ethanol in stories about ethanol.
Jamie
You can’t brag about the numbers without the facts, and as I said on another post, just because the warrenty repairs are going down, doesn’t mean the problems are not there. Service managers talking their way out of making the repair doesn’t mean things are getting better, only the consumer is getting dumber.
Rick Wagoner on the Charlie Rose Show
Saw Charlie Rose’s lengthy interview of CEO Rick Wagoner last night on PBS’s “The Charlie Rose Show.” Very interesting — must be part of a GM campaign to allow journalists to get the word straight from the top. Tonight Charlie Rose interviews Mr Lutz.
Here’s some of what I found most interesting in what Mr Wagoner said:
1. GM has long considered people who buy small cars as doing that only because they can’t afford anything bigger. If I understood Mr Wagoner correctly, GM has considered those who buy small cars as being from the lower (and unprofitable) end of the economic strata. (Does that mean the GM philosophy has been: Only losers buy small cars?)
2. Mr Wagoner acknowledge that few people who bought SUVs ever use them to their full functionality. (He didn’t directly say this, but seemed to imply that never bothered GM since SUVs had such a large profit margin.)
3. Mr Wagoner said that GM is perfectly capable of building quality small cars, and that they do it regularly and profitably in the rest of the world. He mentioned that they sell small cars and trucks in China for as little as $3,500. (So why can’t GM sell a low-priced small car in this country?)
Hello All,
I did not see Mr. LeBeau’s broadcast, but it is refreshing to hear, for a change, that there was a balanced portrayal of the American automotive industry. I do agree there is a predisposition among many (not all) journalists to disparage American ideas and institutions and glorify foreign ones. That is perhaps OK when based on fact, but typically it is agenda-driven.
As for Mr.Wagoner, he has presided over the darkest days of General Motors. He inherited a situation he did not create that was decades in the making.
Most of those problems started at the top somewhere in the late 50’s to mid 60’s and culminated with endless reorganizations, centralizations, acquisitions, spin-offs, brand-management, channeling strategies, dissolving the divisional structure, and worst of all neglecting core business–styling, innovation, production, and marketing of GM automobiles. In short, GM became a follower, and a slow one at that, rather than a leader.
The UAW and the hourly folks get much of the blame in the public’s mind, but this is utterly unfair as well. Sure, there were some troublemakers, but the great majority had a lot of pride in their work and the company they worked for. It is a lasting shame that these folks have suffered the most in the changing fortunes of American industry. Furthermore, if you want to see what your children and grandchildren will someday face with Social Security, just take close a look at what the automakers have had to contend with in their pension/healthcare shortfalls.
Now if Mr.Wagoner can pull off a resurgence of GM to both profitability and a position of undisputed leadership (not only in volume, but in products) in the industry, he will secure a legacy as one of the great industrial giants of all time.
It seems that with Fritz Peterson coming from the financial side, GM finally has someone that understands the tricky relationship between controlling costs and being competitive in the market.
As for Mr.Lutz, he has proven himself to be the greatest automotive marketer (”Car Guy”) of the modern age. I believe the best fruits of his labors are yet to come.
Where does GM go from here? It appears that Chevrolet and Cadillac are well on their way to recovery. They have some excellent current and future products, though not across the board.
As for the other makes (I personally hate the word ‘brand’), in this time of limited corporate resources and economic uncertainty, I would urge GM to make some tough choices.
Both Saturn and Pontiac have had a shot at new products recently (some better than others to be sure), and they need to sink or swim.
That leaves Buick, whose problems over the past 10-15 years can be attributed wholly to the takeaway of product lines and running too long with old models that were never updated, much less re-created. Combine that with terrible marketing and it’s a wonder that things aren’t worse. Considering Buick currently has only 3 models, they have done a somewhat respectable job with what they have. Throughout their recent troubled past, Buick has remained among the top handful of makes in both quality and customer satisfaction. Unfortunately, the reality is that those accomplishments will not help you much.
But what is happening in China is no fluke. The Buick name carries much respect around the world and has since the earliest days of the industry. While Buick’s image is tarnished today in our own country, it can become bright again because of this underlying fact. Phil R referred to it in an earlier post…there was a time when kids thought a Buick was something special. I should know…my family owned many…and much more recently my own kids got positive feedback on their used Buicks from their peers. There has been many a “Billy Bad-Ass” in his Chevy, Ford, Pontiac, etc that learned to steer clear of taking on a Buick if he wanted to keep his reputation intact.
In short, I believe the biggest remaining key in bringing GM back is getting Buick back on track. So please, keep the Invicta name and hasten the return of the Riviera. That name has instant recognition and more goodwill to it than you can imagine.
Finally, get qualified “car people” out in the field working with the dealer organization who understand the dynamics of auto merchandising, distribution and inventory management, sound financial management, who can encourage and inspire dealers to do their best. In the same vane, aggressively find new dealers who are ready for their day in the sun who can promote new products with new enthusiasm. If you haven’t figured it out by now, the big chains are not on your side. One thing has never changed in this business..the retail level is where the battle will ultimately be won…or lost.
Good Luck and Best Wishes!!
Gary J
Houston, Texas
My husband and I have been GM car owners for a number of years now (although we do test drive other vehicles). We watched the show with interest and high hopes that GM will be sucessful. The Volt is a beautiful car and hopefully it will make a splash for GM. A few thoughts to consider, the price will be too high for most people (speaking as a double income couple with no children). GM needs to come out with an energy efficient car that targets the average buyer. Look at how sucessful the Toyota Prius has been. GM can learn a lesson in appealing to the average consumer if they just pay attention. Good luck, we look forward to sucess for GM and supporting you by purchasing more vehicles.
Mr.Lutz
You are one of the guys who gets it done.
Keep up the fight.
Great Job on Charlie Rose tonight, It looks good !
“With GM so embedded in the American psyche, and with so many Americans having had some kind of experience with GM, what could have gone wrong that so many people now hate GM — or at least prefer cars built by other companies? ”
To the contrary, my experience has been that many people who wont buy an American car haven’t owned one in years, if ever. While I believe that some people may have had hard feelings based on actual product experiences 15 or 20 years back I don’t think today’s opinions on GM products are really based on anything but speculation and hearsay. While there are many (including some posting here) that seem to have an unhealthy vendetta against GM I would say most people simply don’t consider GM products when buying a new vehicle. That majority doesn’t really hate GM, they simply don’t believe an American branded vehicle can be of high quality. If people actually did some research and objectively compared vehicles they would see how competitive GM vehicles are in many segments. Unfortunately, many people wont visit anyone buy their local Honda or Toyota dealership when its time to buy. People are simply cheating themselves by not considering all the options.
UAW workers suffer? Lets see, if I did not go to college and wanted to make 28 dollars an hour but not have to work real hard, what would I do? Well, as long as I have a friends in the UAW, I could get that job. Heck, when most of my friends gradute college, they won’t even be making that much.
Thats one of the biggest problems I have seen with GM is paying too much for labor. The 14 dollar an hour program has been long over due. For the tasks at hand, 14 is plenty. The next thing that needs to go is the buddy system. Just because you know someone, does not mean they are the most qualified individual for the job. Go to hiring a true hiring process and find people that really want to work, and quit trying to bring those back who were fired for not doing thier job. What a waste of money that is.
Look at how much better GM treats the UAW compared to the GM employees. GM employees do not get raises, they are cutting head count, taking away benifits, and if they get fired, guess what? Theres no one to try and bring them back in. The UAW does not make great products, the people do. When is anyone going to understand that?
Gary Dikkers,
What are talking about?
GM has built and continues to build some of the best small cars in America.
Small cars are very profitable for GM and they know it. Small cars end up bringing younger people into the GM fold.
Of course, the blame America liberal media doesn’t like that.
The Chevy Cavalier sold very well and it was one of the best small cars. The Cobalt and Saturn and also great cars.
My sister had a Cavalier Z-24 in her college years. It was great. It so impressed her future husband that he dumped his Honda Accord. He prefers GM products now. He’s had a Bonneville and now a new Trailblazer. My sister went from a Cavalier Z-24 to an fully loaded Aurora 4.0. They didn’t even trade the Cavalier Z-24, it was so popular that they sold it for a premium price.
Utility? People need space for their kids.
FYI, Toyota is not number one no matter what the blame America media claims. Gains made during a gas crisis are not real gains. Its kinda like cheating at a ball game. Americans have simply held off buying certain new vehicles during this economy and the fuel spike. These same pompass media and broadcasters have delighted in America’s problems ever since the attacks of September 11, 2001.
The same media watched in silence as Japan manipulated U.S currency after 9/11/01, even when U.S auto companies protested to President Bush. The liberal U.S media were mostly silent. Likewise, stories of trade cheating are virtually ignored by the liberal U.S media, and reported by others.
When the United Financials of Japan became one of the biggest money losing corporations a few years ago, the company was formed from the TOYO trust and was one of Toyota’s largest stock holders and Toyota’s Chairman was a director through it all. The Asian media did report the story regarding Toyota, the TOYO trust and its high debt which no doubt may have boosted Toyota’s share value. However, the liberal U.S media concealed it, and merely listed the UFJ as money losing corporation albeit ignoring any implications or possible ramifications of the story.
Each quarterly sales since 9/11/01, the rabid bunch of media has waited so see if Toyota could sell more. No one really paid attention to them. For nearly a decade, Toyota failed to make it though as the news media has moped around the news room.
The truth is that Americans really appreciate the American auto companies, that’s why the news media uses them in stories to boost their ratings. If American auto companies weren’t so popular, there wouldn’t be so many stories on the news about them. The liberal media knows where the money and the ratings are.
Fortunately the millenial generation is more patriotic than their hippie grandparents who grew up in the 60s-70s and abandoned American values and American. When they see a hot American car, like the Camaro, they soon want one. That’s why many college students today are so dissatisfied with their hippie professors who blame America and American companies for everything. Except of course the record companies.
The market share for many foreign branded vehicles (and foreign branded laptops) comes from the places like the left coast, California, where jobs are being driven out by high taxation and from old people buying their foreign branded products for their kids. Companies are leaving California’s Silicon Valley though, and outsourcing IT jobs, closing up shop. Very soon no one will beable to afford a foreign brand. The free tuition will soon be gone from lack of tax base as the California’s $14 billion budget deficit grows and grows. Even the trendy coffee shops are down in business. Overpaid mortgage brokers are waiting tables. As American companies in Silicon Vally close up and lay off grandpa, needy college students suffer and may not beable to find a bank that can make them a student loan. Then their grandpa’s Toyota won’t have so much influence.
Lexus really doesn’t impress Europeans, the liberal U.S media won’t tell Americans the truth that Lexus only has three tenths of one percent market share in Europe. On the other hand American auto company products do very well in Europe.
Post the European’s Lexus market share figure on a liberal blog website and it will be promptly deleted by the site’s administrator. Free speech?
“1. GM has long considered people who buy small cars as doing that only because they can’t afford anything bigger. If I understood Mr Wagoner correctly, GM has considered those who buy small cars as being from the lower (and unprofitable) end of the economic strata. (Does that mean the GM philosophy has been: Only losers buy small cars?)”
Which is basically true of the entire small car market in the US; not just GM’s approach to it. Small cars in the US have always and still = cheap cars of lower quality and lesser equipment.
“2. Mr Wagoner acknowledge that few people who bought SUVs ever use them to their full functionality. (He didn’t directly say this, but seemed to imply that never bothered GM since SUVs had such a large profit margin.)”
It’s not GM’s responsibility to ask every customer “what do you plan to do with this vehicle; are you sure you need all of this?”. You can’t realistically suggest that Toyota didn’t plan to take some of this cash cow truck market by spending 5 Billion dollars on a truck program do you? Why would it “bother” GM to give customers what they are clamoring for and demanding?
“3. Mr Wagoner said that GM is perfectly capable of building quality small cars, and that they do it regularly and profitably in the rest of the world. He mentioned that they sell small cars and trucks in China for as little as $3,500. (So why can’t GM sell a low-priced small car in this country?)”
A $3500 car in China will not meet crash/saftey standards, emission standards, or expected quality levels as the same car in North America. Customers don’t want a $3500 car no matter how much someone says they do. The subcompact segment is still a poor and relatively small segment even with the high price of fuel – primarily because of the lack of utility in those vehicles – people aren’t clamoring for something smaller than a Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris, or Chevy Aveo. Most people who suggest that a smaller vehicle than these would be a good fit for North America have never driven one and would find that they are highly dissatisfying to drive.
Edwin, “FYI, Toyota is not number one no matter what the blame America media claims. Gains made during a gas crisis are not real gains.”
GM wishes that was true. However, fuel economy (and economy cars) was the wedge that Toyota and Honda used to carve out market share. It’s permanent and it’s increasing. Time and time again, a gas crisis would persuade the Detroit faithful to try a Toyota or a Honda… and they liked it and kept coming back for more.
Toyota is increasing Prius production, over the next three years or so, from 240K or so to about 750K vehicles/year. These will sell. That’s close to an extra half million hybrid cars/year for Toytoa.
Honda will be introducing their new Prius-fighter and probably at the 200K/year level. They wil introduce a hybridized Fit.
In 2011, GM is going to put up a fight against this new flood of hybrids with 10K Volts. That’s not 10K Volts per month, that’s 10K for all of 2011. In other words, GM is surrendering 2011 to Toyota and Honda. Even the 60K they project for 2012 does not stem the tide.
Unless fuel prices really tank in the next two years, these cars will all sell at good prices. That’s a lot of Malibus, G6’s and Auras that will not be sold. It’s going to be lost market share for GM and they won’t win it back until they offer a compelling product, in quantity, at reasonable prices.
The 2010 Lacrosse needs two-tone paint. Don’t let the Europhiles fool you…two-tone is ready for a comeback.
GM needs more manuals.
Mr. Lutz,
I saw you on Larry Rose where you said that GM could not give away the EV vehicle. That completely varies with my experience. I tried numerous times to contact GM to express interest in the car and apart from brochures, never received a follow-up call. In fact, you could probably sell or lease it today.
Perhaps your marketing and sales teams are not listening to your customers.
Regards,
Alan Benjamin
Edwin asked: “Gary Dikkers, What are talking about? GM has built and continues to build some of the best small cars in America.”
Edwin,
Just reporting what I heard CEO Rick Wagoner say during the Charlie Rose interview on Monday. I thought he was pretty clear when he said GM considers small cars to be for those people at the bottom of the economic strata that can’t afford anything better.
Why don’t you listen to the interview and tell me what you think he said?
Edwin said: “Small cars are very profitable for GM and they know it. Small cars end up bringing younger people into the GM fold.”
You may want to discuss that with Mr Lutz. He is on record saying in this blog that GM can’t make any money in the United States selling small cars. Obviously they do in South America, Asia, and Europe, but he sounded confident in his statement that it can’t be done here.
Bob Lutz
GM Vice chairman
I watched the Charley Rose program on PBS that was pretty good too. The news from GM today is that GM is going to spend $500 Million on a new small car and a
brand new 1 to 1.4 ltr piston engine that runs on gasoline. If GM is going to build
a brand new engine why not take a BOLD step and build a completely different
engine. I have been reading about a new type of Rotary engine called the RADMAX
with very few moving parts and with a fuel efficiency of over 20%. Forbes ran a article on this engine several months back. According to that article the Air Force and Boeing were interested in the engine for unmanned aircraft. It looks like a engine that will have many applications since it can run on many types of fuel and it is light weight. I have also seen a video of a prototype running and it looks really neat.
I understand this is not invented in Detroit but it is a American development and GM could do well to find out more about it.
In addition there is also the Coates development that has rotary valves. They claim
high efficiency and almost zero oil changes on that engine. But it is still a piston engine and not as vibration free and smooth running as the RADMAX. Piston engines
have been around for a long time, aircraft made the change from piston engines. It is time for automobiles to do the same. I would like to see GM be the one to lead. Bob you should talk to your Boss.
I purchased a Malibu in 05, after I had a Nissan Altima. I bought the car after I had an experience with a rental and discovered the great ride produced by the car. The ride is similar to the ride of my buddies BMW 5 series. Also the original tires stayed smooth through 40,000 plus miles. The Altima would go through tires in 20,000 miles (alignment and wheel balance was perfect as I had it done multiple times) After 15,000 miles on the Altima the car produced a terrible ride. From a quality standpoint my Altima left me stranded at the airport 2 weeks after I received it (an electrical problem) My Malibu had a very minor problem the dealer was able to fix.
So the reason the ride is so great is related to the stiffness of the body. In its class it has the stiffest body available, equivalent to a BMW 3 series.
So I couldn’t be happier, I hope to buy a Malibu 4 cyl 6 speed next week
Mr. Lutz and Mr. Wagoner,
Gary’s point above illustrates the point that GM should be pointing out how small cars bring in younger buyers to the GM fold.
GM execs probably mean on a per unit basis, they make less on a small car.
How much GM can ultimately make depends on the future income prospects for the small car buyer who can trade up.
In college, my sister sought a small car for her taste. She couldn’t see herself in a large or midsize car yet. She didn’t want a car that was for the guys either. Large or midsize was just not what she wanted then. The Cavalier Z-24 was “cute” for her and she really liked it. So dad got it for her. Daughters get what they want.
Later, she developed a different taste. Her reaction to her first test drive of the Aurora 4.0 was wow, this is a sharp car. She hadn’t heard of the model name Aurora but she likes it, she knew she wanted a champagne color. The V-8, the chrome wheels, and sun roof were right on target. The family recommended they try it out. Her husband brought home a metalic bronze/champagne color and parked it in the driveway, and she took it for a drive and immediately wanted it. Now she takes it to the Cadillac dealer to change the oil, since now sadly, there is no Olds. She sees her “Olsmobile” as better than all the ones she parks next to at the mall. Olds to her is a higher brand.
Now she’s looking for another sedan, and she doesn’t see very many pretty sedans to choose from, and I feel for her, because there isn’t much to choose from. The Cadillac CTS is the leading contender right now, and it is nice, but it may not be quite large enough. And they may just go for a Lincoln Mark S, but it doesn’t have a V-8. And we wished the CTS offered a smaller V-8 like the Aurora 4.0. She doesn’t want an SUV, but if she had to give in to her husband who wants one they would get the Buick Enclave. She’s pretty firm about getting a luxury sedan. The Enclave has the looks, she just wants a luxury sedan. Ironically, everyone in the family really likes the Malibu, but they all have a taste for higher brands. When the topic comes up, its just that they’re not real pleased about trading in a higher brand for a “Chevy.” Chevy for college is ok though. Chevy for an extra car is ok too. But we’d rather have Cadillacs, Buicks, Pontiacs, and Oldsmobiles. If the Malibu was a “Buick” or an “Oldsmobile,” it would have already happened.
GM needs to style up its Buick sedans very soon. Nice powertrains, but the designs are not satisfying GM customers. The buying public of all ages likes stylish sedans. The current Buick sedans are nice cars, nice than many foreign models, but GM can do better on style. GM buyers have good taste and they do like style.
The new DTS and CTS are certainly stylish, but buyers need to be brought into GM to trade up to a Cadillac.
Where are the sedans between the G6/Malibu and the Cadillac CTS. That is the problem with sales right now.
Lincoln Mark S is really a great car also, but again where is sedand between the Mercury Milan and the Lincoln? The MKZ has front grille issues. The MKX crossover is looks really nice and its very comfortable. It would difficult to chose between the MKX and the Enclave.
AN IDEA TO REALLY BOOST MARKET SHARE AND ENTHUSIASM FOR GM:
An idea would be to GM to take the Buick Pontiac GMC dealers and give them a the name “NorthStar Motors by GM”, which would sell all the individual GM named models and brands like the Oldmobile Toronado, the Aurora, the Riviera, GTO, Bonneville, and so on to bring buyers in who have sought luxury appeal outside of GM. That way GM could rotate designs and model names to tease the public back into the showrooms and maintain high levels of interest. We really liked Oldsmobiles like the 1977 Cutlass Supreme, 1984-87 Cutlass Supreme, the Auroras, the Toronados. Pontiacs like the 1976-77 Grand Prix, the 66-67 GTO, the 69 GTO.
The NorthStar emblem would be on the engines, while the brand name (Pontiac, Buick and Oldsmobile, and GMC) would be on the vehicle.
This would focus the public and let GM base customers keep their brand names and models without GM having the pressure making a whole ‘line-up’ for one particular brand.
GM also needs to expand Cadillac vertically and horizontally on styling and sedan size offerings. There is more luxury business out there for GM to take.
Give the Cadillac engines an all new name to excite the buyers and pass down the NorthStar name.
To bring people in to Chevy dealers, GM should have a Corvette branded showroom annex at large metro dealers that looks like a Porshe dealer. A car like the Saturn Sky should go to Chevy and be called a Stinger or a Sting Ray. Other models could have names like i-Vette. The symbol for the fashion oriented brand should be the cross Flags of the Corvette.
GM should rebuild customer loyalty by offering family purchase plan discounts, if they family buys two or three GM vehicles at the same time, they can get a special price or Ten Years of Onstar.
GM credit card points should be allowed to be used toward OnStar renewal.
National service registry and GM loyality service plans.
These other insurance companies are taking business at the dealers from extended GM service plans saying claiming that they have real ASE certified mechanics answering the phones instead of College kids.
David said: “It’s not GM’s responsibility to ask every customer “what do you plan to do with this vehicle; are you sure you need all of this?” Why would it “bother” GM to give customers what they are clamoring for and demanding?”
David,
I guess McDonald’s or Burger King can use the same argument when they sell a 2000 -calorie order of a triple-layer cheeseburger, jumbo fries, and a super-size soda to some 350 lb teenager. Why should it bother Mickey D or BK, afterall they are only selling what the customer was clamoring for?
Or the bartender who sells the seventh martini to a customer at closing time and then watches him stagger out the door to try driving home. Why should it bother that bartender, afterall he was only providing what the customer wanted?
Gary,
Your analogies fail on the basis that some people NEED a vehicle that can tow 5000 pounds and some people NEED a vehicle that can carry 7 passengers and their luggage. So GM is supposed to parse those who need from those who don’t; and refuse customers a product that they can easily get from Toyota or Nissan? I’m sure that’s exactly what Toyota and Nissan were doing when they invested 5 Billion and 3 Billion in full size truck programs only to have them get pummeled to death by GM’s full size trucks. Toyota never intended to sell 200,000 Tundras and 100,000 Sequoias; they were lying right? When they built those plants they knew that they were going to close one and let it sit fallow for two years while they got their next version of the Prius on-line…. The 5 Billion was just a diversion.
As far as I know; even in the two examples you gave in the first one it’s not BK or McD’s responsibility to stop anyone from consuming anything. People need to take responsibility for themselves – and that includes a 350 pound teenager and his parents. When someone leaves a bar intoxicated there is imminent danger that there may be harm to other persons. That’s hardly true of a vehicle purchase and there’s no needs-based questionnaire to be filled out so someone can get “clearance” to buy a particular type of vehicle.
GM has numerous fuel efficient vehicles but the perception is that they don’t. GM has small cars that are very similar to the small cars from Toyota, Honda, and Nissan and of similar quality capability and price. When Bob Lutz says that small cars are losers in the US he’s just telling the truth – they have been losers because you couldn’t charge enough for a small car to make money on it – Americans have been historically loathe to pay more to get what they perceive to be LESS. Until 12 months ago or so the perception on the street of “more” in the eyes of 98% of Americans meant “bigger” or “faster”.
Once again; it’s not GM’s fault that Americans wanted everything bigger and only paid more to get what they wanted. Now Americans are starting to feel that “more” includes fuel economy the economic picture around small cars is changing and it’s possible that customers may be willing to pay more money for a vehicle that while smaller offers better materials and features.
Gary,
Now you’re right on the money. McDonalds shouldn’t be held responsible for the 350lb teenager. The bartender shouldn’t be bothered about the guy who’s had too many. Just like GM shouldn’t be held responsible for what customers do and don’t do with their SUV’s. This is typical America, no one is responsible for their actions, it’s always someone else’s fualt – in this case GM’s or McDonalds for overweight kids.
I hope Mr. Lutz reads this post. I hope it is on the correct place.
Great people make a great company.
Renee M. Conneally, a Program Engineer Manager, was provided a Corvette ZR1 for road testing. Renee and her daugher came to Lincoln, Nebraska to attend a family wedding on Saturday.
Renee learned that on Sunday the local Corvette Club was having a Corvette’s Only Car Show at the local shopping mall. Renee and her daugher took thier time on Sunday to come to the show.
Instantly the ZR1 drew hugh crowd of car and Corvette enthusants. Renee took the mike and explained the features of the new ZR1. She answered scores of questions. It’s clear she LOVES her work and GM. She and her daugher are really troopers who took hours from a family trip to promote GM motors and the new ZR1
With GREAT PEOPLE , LIKE RENEE, GM’s FUTURE WILL BE A SUCCESS!
Thank you!
Roger Keetle,
Car Show Chair,
Nebraska Corvette Association
Lincoln, Nebraska.
My parents just bought a 2008 Malibu LTZ V6 imperial blue. Nice ride too! But I have a somple and straightforward idea. Chevy should sell the el camino again!
David said: “…some people NEED a vehicle that can tow 5000 pounds and some people NEED a vehicle that can carry 7 passengers and their luggage. “
David,
You’ll get no argument from me on that. There ARE some people who need to tow 5,000 lbs and carry seven pax + their luggage. There are also people who need 5-ton dump trucks, or Peterbilts and Kenworths that can pull a 53-ft trailer loaded with 45,000 lbs of cargo down the Interstate. There are also people such as Michael Phelps and Tour de France bike racers who need 12,000 calories each day.
The people that need those kinds of vehicles should have them. The few people who need to eat that many calories a day should have them.
But the problem with SUVs has never been the people who need them — the problem is the people who didn’t need them, but bought them only to satisfy some psychological or social status need.
That’s what surprised me about CEO Wagoner’s interview with Charlie Rose. Mr Wagoner freely acknowledged that most people never used the full functionality of the SUVs they bought. That means GM wasn’t profiting from selling a useful vehicle to people, but instead profiting from fulfilling consumer’s vanity and pyschological needs.
So all along, GM realized they were selling resource-intensive, heavy SUVs to people who didn’t really need them, because it was so profitable for GM. We live in a free-market, profit-driven society, and GM was certainly entitled to do that, but it does display a lack of social awareness and responsibility on GM’s part.
Even as GM put those SUV profits in the bank in the 1990s, they had to have realized that 120 lb women and 190 lb men using three-ton SUVs to do nothing more than commute to work or pick up groceries was a long-range dead end because it was so resource-intensive. What is particulary sad is that GM, Ford, and Chrysler were all complicit in convincing people they had to have SUVs–even though they didn’t need them.
Look at some of those early commercials for SUVs. They don’t tell people they should buy a SUV because they might need to pull a boat, but instead play on the fears of consumers. Some of those commercials were nothing more than blatant emotional appeals, scaring mothers into thinking they were failing their kids unless they used a heavy, safe SUV to take them to school or to soccer practice.
From Mr Wagoner’s interview it is apparent that GM knew exactly what they were doing — the problem is they rode the SUV horse into the ground with apparently little foresight about the future of 9 and 12 mpg heavy vehicles in the era of Peak Oil.
Best regards,
Gary Dikkers
The point is Gary; so was everybody else. GM has fuel efficent cars but you say they don’t and they “rode the horse into the ground’. So did everyone else Gary. And every small car in the US is a cheap car that has low quality interior components and a small profit margin. Shame again on GM for making all of those expensive social contracts with their employees and giving them top-notch health care and retirement for 70 years. GM needed the profit from trucks to maintain that structure of cost tied to those social contracts. Toyota didn’t and won’t because their employees won’t have health care or a pension when they retire. In retrospect they shouldn’t have given all of those people that standard of living.
Don’t act like Toyota, Honda, or anyone else is in this for the social responsiblity aspect because if you believe that you are sadly misinformed.
Hi Gary,
I believe you once told us you owned a GM truck in Wisc. What size engine? 4WD? Do you need a truck? My father was a practical farmer his whole life being 86 today. Always drove GM trucks and never had one with a V8 or 4WD. He manged fine on the farm.
I do agree with you on one point, some consumers do buy vehicles with V8’s or 4WD they will never need. But you can’t hardly blame Rick Wagnor and the advertising department for free choice. The American culture has always been to drive vehicles with V8 engines back as long as V8’s have been around. There are alot of folks who have AWD or 4WD vehicles that will never need them as well but since it is an option they buy them. It’s a peace of mind. The way you put it Gary it sounds like the people are too dumb to think on their own.
Our society, culture, and sometimes outside influences have changed what we drive over the years. First it was cars, then minivans, then trucks and SUV’s , now crossovers and soon alternative propelled smaller vehicles.
As for your comment “the problem with SUVs has never been the people who need them — the problem is the people who didn’t need them, but bought them only to satisfy some psychological or social status need.” I could say the same about those who fly single or dual prop planes for recreation. I’ve been on big commericial jet airplanes that had only 25% seat capicity sold. Is that corporate irresponsibility?
It use to be for every 5 cars sold 1 truck was sold. In the auto business we watched as the consumers turned those numbers around to 5 trucks for every 1 car sold. The big 3 thought it was just a fad and wouldn’t last but it has continued. So much that foriegn car co. started to sell big trucks and SUVs. Are they to blame as well?
As for the commericials Gary I don’t agree. Unless you can describe one I will have to say they never existed. GM has done more for developing new technology for occupant safety then any other company. They didn’t need to “scare” the people into buying big vehicles for extra safety.
Consumers are smart people with many having degrees and or common sense. They will spend their hard eraned money on what they want or think they need. They saw big vehicles for what they can be used for…………extra safety for their loved ones.
Regards
Steven
Gary Dikkers,
David is right.
And its much more. America is a free county with a free market. Time to dust off Reagan’s evil empire speech Its not the job of liberal elites to promote a marxist dicatorship of relativism in the U.S, even though some of them seem to think so. They cling to Stalin’s worldview of having mass transit system (for the masses of course) and nice vehicles for the Party elites only. They waste taxpayer money digging tunnels.
But’s that’s how it is in the U.S with liberal elites who ride in their limos and private jets, while their rank and file suffer high gas prices.
The Marxists promote the fraud of a world with limits, its just a game for them, they live in a fake world of catch 22’s. But the truth is that the U.S and Canada have more oil than than the Middle East, in shale oil and oil sands, not to mention domestic drilling opportunities. There are cost effective environmentally safe methods today for extracting shale oil and oil sands. So there is plenty of fuel and plenty. There is clean coal technology, coal gasification, cellulostic ethanol, and much more, including nuclear. The virtually limitless supply of resources in the West and the success of the free market so frightens the far left.
We know which party supports producting more energy for America now don’t we, that is real hope and real change.
Supply and demand. More supply of fuel and the price of oil falls.
People need large vehicles for their families. Yes we, know in liberal elitist countries, they don’t promote families, they limit children and frown on family values. Europeans are also in a birth dirth, they face extinction from their liberal dictatorship of relativism.
When the intelligent scientists retired suddenly the earth started warming in the libraries of liberal think tanks. But in reality, the sea level is not rising and the earth is not warming. So called consensus replaced expertise, the norm for the liberlal dicatorship of relativism.
And the drive by media latched onto the hoax.
The earth is a biosphere, not a greenhouse for liberal elites to keep house plants and manipulate. Nature doesn’t comport to liberal systems of thought.
But oh yes, Al Gore, is the all knowing, nonscientist- politician who earned his Nobel prize for a movie.
The climate cycle and the nature have been working for millions of years far beyond what people can effect.
Visit the ocean frequently, and nope, sea level is not rising, not today, not yesterday, and not tomorrow.
———————–
Charlie H,
Prius sales are down, subcompact sales are down, Camry and Accord sales are down from a few years ago.
The Malibu is more fuel efficent than Camry or Accord.
Toyota is not number one, gains made during a war since 9/11 are not real gains, its kinda like cheating at ball game. Afterall, Toyota numbers come from their half owned subsidiary Daihatsu.
The foreign competition makes its gains when the U.S economy is down. The liberal media has desperately panted around the newrooms since 9/11/1 waiting to bash America for eight years now thinking Toyota might sell more, even falsely claiming it to get their headline.
Hybrids are a sales gimmick to mullify liberal talk shows, and they are not profitable. Wind and solar are simply tokens, they can’t produce enough energy. It takestoo much energy to extract hydrogen, so will only be useful for backup systems. Their won’t ever be that much of a free source of electricity to produce sufficient hydrogen
Electric cars like the Volt may do better. And they may be effective for back up systems rather than core transportation.
There is real hope and change, its called shale oil, oil sands, off shore drilling, cellulostic ethanol, and nuclear power. And we know who supports that don’t we.
US and Canada have more oil than the Middle East.
There are cost effective, environmentally safe, High Temperature Fuel Cell methods for extracting oil from shale and oil sands that do not require a water source. That is real hope and change.
Gary,
Isn’t the job of marketing to convince people to purchase something, even if they don’t really need it? Marketing creates a need, many times a need that doesn’t really exist. To me, it sounds like GM, along with Ford and Chrysler were just good at marketing the products that they had. The same thing goes for McDonalds and BK. I agree 100% with David and Tim, that people need to take responsibility for their actions, which doesn’t happen too much in this country anymore – it’s always someone else who made them do it.
Bob,
I just read your interview with leftlanenews.com and I have to say it is troubling at best. I think you are arrogant, perhaps irresponsible in your view of diesels and I’m not sure if you really understand the economy car market or consumer. Here are 2 excerpts from the article – both your quotes.
“So here’s the equation for the American customer: He pays $5,000 more for the car. He gets a 20 percent fuel economy savings but buys a fuel that costs 20% more per gallon. You tell me where the benefit is.”
“The overwhelming popularity of diesel engines is a fiction perpetuated by certain German manufacturers and the news media.”
Bob, I own a 2003 Golf TDI. I paid a $2500 premium for it over the gas model. I currently pay 10% more per gallon on fuel (although for the past 5 years it has been less) and I get 100% better fuel economy – really, this car averages 50MPG – every tank! I drive 60miles per day to and from work —> Bob, it’s not hard for me to tell you where the benefit is: the fact that I have cut my fuel bill in half and the convenience of only filling up every other week (600 miles). Did I mention my current resale value is $5000 over the gas model – gravy!
So do diesels really last longer than gas engines – that I can’t answer – maybe it is a German myth. But with gas at $4 a gallon, I’m saving $1500 a year trying to prove this one out.
Al,
You are using a paradigm based on a gasoline powered car that only gets 25mpg and a diesel that only has a $2500 premium. New direct-injection gasoline engines with turbos will cut that difference by more than half without expensive and short-lived exhaust after treatment that will add another $2500 to the cost of the diesel. Diesels aren’t popular in the US because of issues with earlier diesel engines and the relatively long period of time to recoup costs over gasoline. With the cost gap only getting larger; Lutz is right, without some rationalization on the part of emissions regulators the diesel is a weak business case in the US.
Al,
I agree your 2003 Jetta TDI is great on fuel, and did probably only cost $2500 more than a gas counterpart. The problem is the fact that your car is a 2003. New emission regs came into effect in 2007, and more very stringent regs are coming in 2010. Both sets of regualations will reduce fuel economy, and increase of the cost of a diesel car. The 2007 regs basically mandated using a particulate filter on the exhaust that a) costs a lot of money and b) reduces fuel economy because it increases back pressure, and must be “regenerated” which means the particulate that gets filtered out must be burned off, which is done by using more fuel to heat the exhaust.
The 2010 regs will further add cost, because either a SCR (Selective Catalyst Reduction) or LNT (Lean NOx Trap) must be used to reduce NOx emissions. Both these techonoligies cost money in hardware and calibration development. Plus, most engines that will use SCR will need to carry a reductant on board which will have to be refilled by the user which will add cost. A LNT system must run rich every 10-15 seconds or so to clean off the LNT catalyst, which of course uses fuel, so that will reduce fuel economy.
So, just because your 5 year old TDI gets great mileage, and didn’t cost much more than a gas engine doesn’t mean that is going to continue. So before you call Bob Lutz arrogant and irresponsible, perhaps you should get all the facts.
Tim,
The only fact required is that I am a potential customer. I don’t care about 2010 regulations, SCR or LNT – those are just excuses. Bob wanted to know where the benefit is for a diesel car, I think I gave him a pretty good answer – based on my own experience.
I am eventually going to want a new car and when that time comes I am going to be very dissapointed if I can’t get something better than what I have today. I am very happy with VW and I am confident they will continue to offer products I want – the ‘09 Jetta TDI looks great and I could use the extra space offered in the wagon. What competitive product will GM offer me for ‘09? Oh that’s right – SCR, LNT – I understand.
When I read articles like that posted on Leftlanenews.com I question whether I will be able to shop GM for my next car – I thought Bob and the GM shareholders might want to know why.
Al,
GM enthusiasts would agree that Volkswagon has done a smart job with exterior styling.
From what I’ve heard, GM could offer diesels in its cars like the Camaro. Before the price of diesel rose, the rumor at the auto show was GM was considering a diesel option for the Camaro, and it would achieve very high mileage. If the price comes down maybe they’ll take a new look at diesel. According to reports, GM has new right sized diesel engines coming so don’t get discouraged.
Not sure of the price of the option for cars, but if the price were too high, customers would obviously prefer the gasoline engines.
I have very good friends who have Volkswagons. Volkswagon does have smart styling. GM’s new styling is attracting new customers. Take an honest look at the Aura and the Malibu, they are wonderful cars, and very stylish designs, and they are very fuel efficient. They offer a fine selection of engine choices. The actual mileage of GM cars I’ve rented and owned are generally higher than the EPA estimate.
Not sure if you are new to GM culture. Bob Lutz really does impress us. He’s one of the best corporate executives in the world and he has proven that he cares a great deal about the customers wants and needs. So he’s probably just trying to analyze what offerings would help consumers under the present price of diesel. We like his comments and we’re glad he’s leading the way. GM has a great management team, and thats created plenty of confidence inspite of the nation’s present economic difficulties.
If these were better economic times, no doubt, GM and the other American car makers would be doing quite well and offering much more to consumers.
GM has been a market leader on offering great affordable options to the consumer.
Al,
How are those excuses? VW had to stop selling the TDI briefly in the US until they could meet emissions. They will have to face the same regulations GM will in 2010, and you much loved Jetta may only get 40MPG and cost $4500 more than a gas counterpart? Are you still willing to pay the premium, when a gas engined Jetta will probably get 30+ MPG, and the fuel costs less?
I AM GM said: “Hi Gary, I believe you once told us you owned a GM truck in Wisc. What size engine? 4WD? Do you need a truck?”
Steven,
Yup, I do own one, and I’d say I’m a pretty responsible truck owner. It’s a 2WD, four-cylinder GMC Sonoma with a five-speed manual. I live in the suburbs and use it for light hauling — bringing home fertilizer, lumber, and landscaping supplies from Home Depot or Menard’s; taking yard waste out to the landfill; and now and then a tent camping trip. (I fill up the back with our tent, sleeping bags, etc. and head out to the North Woods for a few days.)
Over the last few years I’ve averaged driving it about 2,500 miles a year. When I drive it on the highway, I get a solid 32 mpg. Not bad for a light truck. Too bad GM forgot how to market and sell trucks like that.
“My father was a practical farmer his whole life being 86 today. Always drove GM trucks and never had one with a V8 or 4WD. He manged fine on the farm.”
My hat’s off to him. He sounds like a practical person who needed a truck and used the right tool for the job. I’ve never had a problem with the people who own trucks and SUV’s and who need them to accomplish some practical job. My problem is with the people who buy SUV’s for nothing more than vanity reasons.
“As for the commericials Gary I don’t agree. Unless you can describe one I will have to say they never existed. GM has done more for developing new technology for occupant safety then any other company. They didn’t need to “scare” the people into buying big vehicles for extra safety.”
They did exist. Haven’t seen one for a few years, but they were blatant emotional appeals meant to scare mother’s into thinking they weren’t good mothers unless they used huge, heavy, SUVs to carry their kids “safely” to school, dance lessons, and piano and soccer practice.
The sole purpose of those commercial was to scare people into buying something they didn’t really need because GM, Ford, and Chrysler could make more money when they scared people into buying them.
“They saw big vehicles for what they can be used for…………extra safety for their loved ones.”
Not until they got a big emotional push from those clever marketeers at GM, Ford, and Chrysler. (Your line “extra safety for their loved ones” sounds like it came direct from one of those emotional commercials.)
Jeff said: “Isn’t the job of marketing to convince people to purchase something, even if they don’t really need it? Marketing creates a need, many times a need that doesn’t really exist. To me, it sounds like GM, along with Ford and Chrysler were just good at marketing the products that they had.”
Jeff,
Of course that’s the job of the marketeers. The question: “Is that socially responsible.”
In a world with unlimited resources it wouldn’t matter. If we had a completely unlimited, unconstrained supply of iron, aluminum, rubber, petrochemicals for plastics, and fossil fuels, who cares how heavy a car someone drives, or how much fuel they burn to push it?
But our world doesn’t have unlimited resources. Everytime a 120 lb woman goes to the grocery store in a three-ton SUV she is needlessly and wastefully consuming a resource that could have benefited someone else in our world.
I guess you might say the one thing that marks SUV owners who don’t need or use their full functionality, is that they are selfish. People are supposed to have learned in kindergarten about sharing and not hogging resources.
And the fact is that GM, Ford, and Chrysler leveraged those people’s selfishness for their profit.
Best Regards,
Gary Dikkers
Al said:
“The only fact required is that I am a potential customer. I don’t care about 2010 regulations, SCR or LNT – those are just excuses. Bob wanted to know where the benefit is for a diesel car, I think I gave him a pretty good answer – based on my own experience.
I am eventually going to want a new car and when that time comes I am going to be very dissapointed if I can’t get something better than what I have today. I am very happy with VW and I am confident they will continue to offer products I want – the ‘09 Jetta TDI looks great and I could use the extra space offered in the wagon. What competitive product will GM offer me for ‘09? Oh that’s right – SCR, LNT – I understand.”
Today; there may be benefit in a diesel car but you can’t make a business case to support the importation of a product built in Europe for 18 months in an environment of a weak dollar and strong Euro eroding profitability. And then have the entire basis for that product’s existence in North America fade away with the greatly increased price for the diesel package coupled with the cost of diesel fuel over gasoline in 2010. Why would any company import a product that will not make money and will not have any sales when considered carefully by customers? The old GM would have done that but not the GM of today. For the package to be worthwhile it would have to sell in sufficient volumes and for a long enough period of time to recoup the investment necessary to certifiy it for use in North America. It’s clear that if a diesel carries a $5000 premium that there’s going to be a significantly reduced sales volume for those models when they can only offer 20% better mileage using fuel that costs 20% more. The customer gets no payoff in their ownership of the diesel product so there’s no incentive for them to purchase it.
If it wasn’t for GMs new products, our Country would be hurting big time. GM has poured a ton of money into our tax coffers and their workers have too. They’ve made classics and some return.
One thing I’ve noticed lately at classic car show is the attention that 2nd generation Corvairs get. People love the styling. Now that we have a new Camaro, could the beautiful Corvair return? It would be far better looking then 99% of the cars out on the market.
Take the design, add a steam/electric hybrid engine, all-wheel drive, good seats, but keep it simple.
People are amazed about the room in a Corvair plus the beautiful design. Upgrade it up to 2011 specifications and you’d have a winner! Please give us a car with a semi-bench seat with a stick shift. Anybody that had one can tell you that cruising is great this way. ‘ nuff said.
Then maybe you could make a sexy cruiser wagon like the old Nomad was. Beautiful and useful.
People also seem to forget that GM built some of the worlds quickest cars using turbo-sixes. Alot of people go nuts over big motors, but for real driving, give me a six.
Good luck gentlemen, the future is looking great!
Mark
Edwin, You should write letters and essays like that for your descendants. Then they’ll know why we didn’t act in time.
Mr. Lutz:
Here are some comments from a lifetime car enthusiast.
1. The Chevy Malibu and Cadillac CTS are great cars for their respective markets. My only gripe is that GM should get into the 21st century with braking and make standard slotted (non rusting) rotors and bigger higher quality car identified calipers. Take a look at what Infiniti is doing.
The truck lines need better quality rotors and calipers. They should be at least the size and quality of the new Toyota Tundra.
2. The Pontiac Solsitce and Saturn Sky are good looking but seem to lack the fit and finish of a Mazda Mx-5 or a Honda S2000.
3. The Chevrolet Volt is impressive. Why is there no effective anticipation based marketing for this product? Where is the branding? Toyota has been been successful with the branding and logo of Hybrid Synergy Drive. GM makes better quality vehicles than Toyota. They outmarket and outbrand GM.
4. Why is there nothing on the table for a retro style Pontiac GTO? The new Camaro will be successful. The Holden GTO is a nice car but lacks the appeal of the Dodge Challenger or even the Mustang.
5. Here is the most important element of change for GM to be successful from my perspective. GM dealerships lack continuity accross the board. I owned three Saturns. I selected the car because of the no haggle pricing. Why can’t all of the dealerships work on this model? This insults the intelligence of the buyer and wastes time when they need to haggle. Would I get the same level of service from a Cadillac dealership compared to a Lexus, Infiniti,Mercedes or BMW dealership? No I don’t think so. I say this because I know owners of all five of the aforementioned. They think the CTS like me is a great car. However, most of them will be unlikely buyers because they have developed lifelong relationships with their respective dealers. This is an exception with GM dealerships from my perspective. The only Cadillac dealer I ever knew with that rapport was my father’s. His name is Arthur Hanna. He was with King O’Rourke in Nesconset, NY for many years. Where is he now? He sells insurance.
The marketing of and to the dealerships from my perspective is the reason that GM is in trouble. They all need a 21st century makeover with a concentration on long term Customer Retention and Satisfaction.
Sorry, Bob. Here’s my prediction for the next 10 years. Honda, Ford and Toyota will surpass Chevrolet and GM as the best selling car brands in America, period. There’s nothing I see on the horizon that will change GM’s destiny. I am very disappointed with this company. My next car will definitely be the Honda Insight.
Mr. Lutz,
While I was only able to view the few video snips on CNBC.com, I came away with a feeling that GM may at least be on the right track for recovery. Being able to admit that quality was slumping and that changes have to be made in order to be more competitive in today’s market is a good start. I think that the denial of past performance was only counterproductive to future successes. It seems that GM may be able to learn from its failures and change its strategy to be more competitive. I believe that GM will have to deliver some kind concrete proof of the quality of their vehicles rather than a positive slogan to reinforce it. I also believe that there must be consistency in the advertising in relation to the quality element across all the GM brands in order to associate the whole line of the company’s vehicles with durability.
I think it is a very positive sign that Buick is so popular in China. I work for a car rental business on the south side of Chicago. I truly enjoy putting people in the La Crosse, Enclave, and Lucerne. I know when they return, they will be pleased with their experience. I can usually get people to pay extra for an upgrade in size to a Buick when it is on the lot. I usually get a sour expression when I tell the renter that I have a Buick for them. I follow it up with, “This is not your grandfathers Buick.” I think that Buicks still have a preconception against them that they are an older person’s vehicle. I think that an affordable luxury aura may be an effective may to reach a younger audience. I can’t tell you how many Buick styled portholes that I have seen on vehicles around my store (some are attached in a seemingly haphazard design). I think the market is there to be tapped with the right advertising.
I believe that having a race car driver of Earnhardt Jr. fame test drive the Camero is just the right kind of marketing that is needed to generate excitement. Having a true fast car aficionado give feedback lends credibility to your product. It builds an image that is necessary to differentiate a product from its competitors. I believe that GMC is taking the correct steps with such product placements as in the Transformers movie and heavy advertisement runs during NFL football.
I can only hope that GM has success with the Volt. It seems like a lot of positive buzz has been built around the product. It is a little disconcerting that there is not a working lithium battery developed yet. I think it looks pretty sharp overall. It brings an aerodynamic look to the hybrid type vehicle market.
All in all, I believe that GM is definitely capable of recovering from its current struggles. It seems like you have the right kind of attitude and abilities to lead the company to future successes. I truly think that with the correct mix of marketing and quality products that GM can make significant strides in regaining its market share.
Hey Gm ,
shouldn’t you have put the volt concept in a wind tunnel before you hyped the crap out of it to check is areodynamic properties? So basicaly you lied to the American car buying public (again) and now you think its all right to try to sell an us another ugly $40, 000 car?
Isn’t that what cadilacs are for??
retire all ready.
Yo GM! Stop being a loser! The leak of Volt photos is not a big deal. Although I must say it looks really good. But it will have a huge challenge to compete with the new Insight and Prius. Unless the Volt is certified to have 100 mpg mileage, a price tag of 40k will kill this vehicle! The Insight, with 60 mpg, only starts at 18k.
Mr. Wagoner, Mr Lutz, et.al.,
Why not ask President Bush to use his National Emergency Powers to fix the liquidy crisis by suspending of the Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (NRSRO) like S&P, Moody, and Fitch, from downgrading credit of major industries, especially Auto makers/manufacturers, who need access to credit during the liquidity crisis.(The rationale is that major companies sustain orders for durable goods for a broad range of small business). Unless this is done the banking/credit crisis will worsen.
The President has this authority – broad emergency economic powers – to respond to this type of economic emergency (liquidity crisis) during a wartime conflict, especially since Congress defined National Emergency Powers, Constitutionally in legislation, by (1) limiting the duration of emergency powers to two years, and by (2) Congress’ authority by resolution to remand the Executive action.
HOW: The President should allow major companies/industries with demonstrated Cash Flow to have access to credit in order to work the way back to profitability from the 9/11/01 attacks and the market fears caused by the war. President Bush should act soon, the FED cannot handle it, and Congress is gridlocked. The NRSROs have created a liquidity crisis by unwarranted downgrades precipitated by wartime fears in the market of companies that have sufficient cash flow, such as Automakers/major manufacters. If the President doesn’t temporarily suspend the NRSROs authority to limit credit, the Credit crunch could worsen from further contraction in the coming weeks and result in the collapse of one or more major financial institutions. The President should act now and not wait.
Mr Lutz,
Do you plan to make a truck version of the volt? We have electric busses an electric locomotives driven with a generater system that gives great benefits in fuel eficency,cant we do this with our suv and truck platforms?
Well well well … look what just a few more months have brought. GM’s bankruptcy being the greatest thing that GM left in their wake, literally HUNDREDS of acres of toxic waste on the abandoned sites that became part of the ‘looser’ spin-off company. That’s quite telling of a company that brags in commercials on how ‘green’ they are … flag waving and all (even though much of their product now days is made in China, Canada, Mexico etc … U.S.A. made?). One of the posts above mentions Lutz, and that he only “inherited” the disaster that is now GM. No .. he was appointed by his own kind. That kind, btw, didn’t begin just 3 or 4 decades ago … no. It began long before that, back when GM bought up trolleys, so they could crush ‘em … forcing folks to buy cars, in stead of using more efficient rail transportation. Myth? NO. The Feds took GM to court over that vile act, and GM was found guilty. So you see? Lutz is just another arrogant dinosaur in a significant line of arrogant dinosaurs … thinking about nothing more than the next few quarter’s profits. Should GM even be around long enough to make another car, perhaps they should call it the , “CARMA”. Oh wait … Fisker already beat them to it … & with an electric car no less. But don’t get me started on GM’s EV1. Crushing all of them? They never did that to the Chevy Vega, or any of their other looser products. But then, GM didn’t need to send a message regarding THOSE products. The EV1 message? THIS is what we’ll do if you try to force us into building a product with less profit than a pickup, or less profit than an SUV. Good going, GM. And as GM goes, so goes the U.S.A. as the ol’ saying goes.
>>”That is what it is going to take to right the ship for GM – 10 consecutive, solid, complete, and essentially astounding years of producing cars and trucks that DO NOT BREAK! Not a power window failur, not a radio glitch, not a strut wear out, not a head liner sagg, no oil leaking or burning, no coolant leaking, and no alternators wearing out….. on every car and truck that carries the blue square somewhere on or in it.”
NOBODY builds a car that well. My neighbor drives BMWs, his wife has a Scion. Stuff breaks on their cars. BMW stuff, toyota stuff, NASA stuff. Stuff breaks. In a small percentage of cars, all the tolerances in design and mass manufacturing work together and an outstanding vehicle is built. In an equally small percentage, the tolerances go the other way, and a horrible piece of wheeled junk ends up on a showroom floor. I have a colleague with a Toyota pickup that was riddled with problems from the day he drove it away from the new car showroom. Someone else has a ten-year old Yukon, problem free.
>>”I’m probably the only guy on earth who has had trouble with three consecutive Hondas and have subsequently sworn off of them.”
Honda and Toyota are made of parts made of earth-bound materials. I’ve fixed enough of both. See above about ’stuff’
>>”but until GM management make these cars compelling values in todays market GM will not be able to boost sales”
They offer comparable cars to Honda and Toyota at lower prices. Sure, everyone wants the best quality at the best prices. Tell BMW you want to buy a 5-series for $30k.
>>”higher waged line workers with lower waged ones as were shown in this special. While I understand and accpet this change I’m curious how quality will still be met on the line. Its quite simple in my mind that the guy who made 32$ an hour simply cares more”
The problem in this GM town has been that the higher paid workers were union, and didn’t care about quality. The viewpoint of the GM worker was that job security came from the union, and quality was something that was not the worker’s problem. “I’m not paid enough to do that.” has been a common attitude for union employees. Pay was based on union contract, not anything else.
>>”Build factories here again. Bring over diesels.”
Ever hear of Duramax diesel? Built in Ohio, part of the US. Factories here have to deal, quite often, with unions. See above.
>>”What would be their motivation to do that? If a journalist doesn’t have creditability he or she doesn’t have anything. Their jobs depend on getting the facts right.”
Journalism jobs depend on pleasing the sponsors, advertisers. Sponsors are pleased when you increase the number of people who read, listen, watch. People pay attention when you say “All your life’s problems are because this country sucks, and look! Britney’s almost naked!”
>>”…$3,500…(So why can’t GM sell a low-priced small car in this country?)”
What HondaToyotaMazda have you seen that costs less than $5,000? To make a car that passes DOT and EPA and other government standards isn’t easy. try it.
GM and Ford have come from behind to become competitive with Toyota and Honda. What they have not overcome is the Paradigm, the set of beliefs that have been ingrained in people, that domestic cars are bad.
GM has been saddled with union contracts, supplier contracts, an outdated dealer network. They are working hard to change it, but the Pardigm is harder to overcome.
The media has been hard on domestic cars, fake exploding gas tanks on GMs [NBC 'journalism' made the story up] while glossing over import problems. Going after the #1 carmaker is hitting the biggest target.
Many foreign models never see US dealers until they have been proven successes overseas, which is why many US carmakers have adopted the same pattern, letting a new model get released overseas and tried out before coming here.
Volkswagen has been popular here, yet the horror stories of Audi and VW cars that had to go in for service every three months abound. Maybe Toyota and Honda make it look easy, but it isn’t. For decades, Honda never built a pickup or SUV, or a rear wheel drive, or a V6 or a convertible. Specialization makes it easy to be good. Now that Toyota has entered the full-size pickup market, they are finding it to be tough.
GM has built everything from semi trucks to small cars, years before we had Honda or Toyota dealers here.
Ever hear of the Corvair? The Olds F-85, the first Pontiac Tempest, the small Buick Special of the early sixties? If people really wanted those, they would have built and sold more.
The little aluminum V8 from that GM era was sold off to Rover in the UK, where it has become legendary, and ended up powering thirty years of Land Rovers.